Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I will always wonder if the killer might not have gotten a life with possibility of parole sentence had she not claimed self defense, not taken the stand, not tried to make Travis the villain...but instead had come clean about her guilt and shown remorse. Even if her psychopathy does not understand the concept of remorse...it does understand being able to act, to manipulate, to con. She could have very well faked remorse well enough to be believed by many people...not most people, but many more than had ever been in her camp or even on the fence. I cannot completely negate the possibility that the judge might have allowed for release one day has this killer conducted herself differently and had her defense been put to the court differently. Killer needed to show contrition at every opportunity, with her defense team constantly pointing out those showings.

I agree with everyone that it would always have been a verdict of first degree murder...but I think the sentence could have turned out differently.

I don't think so because of the degree of overkill. She killed him 3 different ways. Because of the viciousness of the kill- this was NO self-defense, she is someone who shouldn't get out after a few years of good behavior. The only real difference between her and Leslie Van Houten is that she didn't have a Charles Manson influencing her.
 
She was incapable of even acting remorseful, IMO. The best she could do in her secret testimony was to say " I wish I had that day to do over again." And the best she could offer up at sentencing was "I'm disgusted with myself."

I think DeMarte explained the best, and especially, what the had to do internally to prepare herself to murder Travis. DeMarte said the had to devalue Travis so completely as to convince herself that she was completely justified in taking his life.

The did that. I have no doubt at all she still believes Travis deserved to die. One of her tweets as she waited to hear whether or not the first jury was going to sentence her to death said it all. She quoted lyrics from whatever song that said- why did you have to say goodbye, why did you do this to me, I'm crying now (and it's all your fault).


If she had the day over again, she'd still kill him, she'd just be smarter about it- her cleanup and not getting caught.
 
We don't agree that what Travis said to her on May 26 was cruel. I don't think it was, and my opinion about that has nothing to do with "hating" the .

As for whether or not his choice of words on May 26 tipped the balance. Once again, I disagree. I don't think it was his words that drove her to murder, I think it was the fact that he made it entirely clear to her that he was never going to marry her and didn't want her in his life. At all. Wasn't going to change his mind.

What JM has said is he believes the fact of that rejection is what drove her to murder. Even if May 26 hadn't happened at all, IMO sooner or later the was going to be confronted with that rejection by Travis, no matter how gently he told her she was never ever going to be the One.

BBM. ITA, those were not cruel words, only when taken out of context.
 
I am not understanding how Travis dead was more convenient to her than Travis alive. He was no threat to her other than emotionally and the way I see it...she killed him because she always had to have the last word.

Arias is unable to let go, ever, of anything, unless on her terms. In court her answers rambled in her attempts to have the last word on as many subjects as possible. And she would try to taunt JM sometimes during questioning just to have the last word.

I think having the last word wherever possible gives Killer an enormous sense of satisfaction. It is, to me, why she was the way she was in court as well as in before and after trial interviews. And who will ever forget her final statement to the court at sentencing!

This killer had many opportunities to making this look better for herself, yet every single opportunity was missed because of her desperate need to have the last word, to say what she wants said regardless of how damaging it might be. I think the bulk of any problems she has while incarcerated are going to occur because of that need. And I think she sits in prison for the rest of her life because of that need.

IMO

She could have seen him as a threat to her being able to move on. She wanted marriage. She considered Mormon men one dating pool. She also had put in time with endless PPL meetings and had contacts/targets there. She was almost 28. IMO she wanted to move on and felt the need to do it quickly. Therefore she was going to fish in the PPL and Mormon ponds for her future husband.

She told her sister that Ryan was her soulmate IIRC. What was going to happen when Travis/Ryan run into each other at a convention? Or a mutual friend relays info that Ryan is dating his ex? IMO she thinks Travis will bad mouth her and ruin her future. He might warn the next target about her stalking, tire slashing, phone snooping etc.

And yes, Jodi was going to have the last word, not Travis.
 
I don't think so because of the degree of overkill. She killed him 3 different ways. Because of the viciousness of the kill- this was NO self-defense, she is someone who shouldn't get out after a few years of good behavior. The only real difference between her and Leslie Van Houten is that she didn't have a Charles Manson influencing her.

Since there is no way we can ever really know about that particular what if, it will always be something for me to wonder about. I remember how sure everyone was that Casey Anthony would be on Death Row...

You can never know for sure how a case will end, and even then you never know for sure if that end will stick.
 
The jury (even the ones who wanted to sentence her to death) conceded that some of what TA said was 'abusive.' I don't shock easily at all, and even I was aghast at some of his words. Those words were abusive, and no one I know would ever put up with being called the things he said. I knew the moment I heard those email exchanges/text exchanges that a line had been crossed, especially in someone with BPD, and that was the beginning of the final spiral.

I do believe JA would have had trouble ever walking away, but had those words never been spoken, TA might have gotten to live longer than he did; perhaps he would not have been murdered at all, or perhaps she would have killed him eventually but later on. To pretend nothing abusive or nasty ever came out of TA's mouth is to deny his human frailty, something Travis didn't deny in himself. He was imperfect, and he was not merely a spectator, but a participant in a semi-secretive, dysfunctional situation that spiraled way beyond anything he could imagine, with a lethally disordered narcissistic woman who unleashed her inner rage killer.


I didn't find what he said to her as abusive- she deserved every word for what she put him through, and not taking "No" for an answer. I would have said many of the same things myself to her, but much sooner on than he did. He tried for too long to be nice about it and she didn't take his hints. She would still have killed him, just maybe not then, but I still think finding Mimi's name on the Cancun ticket sealed the plan in her mind that she'd already made plans for.
 
She could have seen him as a threat to her being able to move on. She wanted marriage. She considered Mormon men one dating pool. She also had put in time with endless PPL meetings and had contacts/targets there. She was almost 28. IMO she wanted to move on and felt the need to do it quickly. Therefore she was going to fish in the PPL and Mormon ponds for her future husband.

She told her sister that Ryan was her soulmate IIRC. What was going to happen when Travis/Ryan run into each other at a convention? Or a mutual friend relays info that Ryan is dating his ex? IMO she thinks Travis will bad mouth her and ruin her future. He might warn the next target about her stalking, tire slashing, phone snooping etc.

And yes, Jodi was going to have the last word, not Travis.

I suppose in her sick mind, she could have. Too bad she never considered that murder might be a detriment to her being able to move on.
 
I am not understanding how Travis dead was more convenient to her than Travis alive. He was no threat to her other than emotionally and the way I see it...she killed him because she always had to have the last word.

Arias is unable to let go, ever, of anything, unless on her terms. In court her answers rambled in her attempts to have the last word on as many subjects as possible. And she would try to taunt JM sometimes during questioning just to have the last word.

I think having the last word wherever possible gives Killer an enormous sense of satisfaction. It is, to me, why she was the way she was in court as well as in before and after trial interviews. And who will ever forget her final statement to the court at sentencing!

This killer had many opportunities to make things look better for herself, yet every single opportunity was missed because of her desperate need to have the last word, to say what she wants said regardless of how damaging it might be. I think the bulk of any problems she has while incarcerated are going to occur because of that need. And I think she sits in prison for the rest of her life because of that need.

IMO

Jodi was all about manipulating her way into whatever social situation suited her. That required her to have the ability to present the image she wanted to project and have it come off as viable. Travis knew how Jodi really was, how difficult she was to deal with when she didn't get her way, how manipulative she was, how she could lie her way into and out of a given situation as needed, how she really just used those around her, her stalking, obsessive attitude towards her relationship with Travis, even when she said she was fine moving on, all of this Travis could convey to a future prospect or to the community at large and prevent Jodi from moving freely based on the stories and image she wanted to project.

I agree about her need to be right and end up on top. That to me explains the way she killed Travis, the rest explains the why.
 
To say that she had to devalue him would mean that he would have had to have some real value to begin with. That was present, but only in the sense that she thought she could get something out of him. She never really valued him as a person. As it became clear she wasn't going to get what she wanted from him his 'value' to her naturally decreased, but to assume she ever really valued him and then devalued him is to attribute to her an element that was never present.

I guess it's a subtle distinction that plays on the surface identically, but I think the distinction more accurately reflects her psychology.

As far as her being a victim, I agree she played the victim all of her life when it suited her, but to believe that reflects a true internal self-identity contradicts her obvious belief in her own superiority and sense of entitlement. Her victim-hood was never more than a strategy, and not a true part of her psychological make up.

Any relationship she ever had with anyone, casual or otherwise, was always based on what was in it for her. I do not believe she ever valued anyone as a person.
 
Any relationship she ever had with anyone, casual or otherwise, was always based on what was in it for her. I do not believe she ever valued anyone as a person.

Exactly. You can't devalue what was never valued in the first place.
 
Jodi was all about manipulating her way into whatever social situation suited her. That required her to have the ability to present the image she wanted to project and have it come off as viable. Travis knew how Jodi really was, how difficult she was to deal with when she didn't get her way, how manipulative she was, how she could lie her way into and out of a given situation as needed, how she really just used those around her, her stalking, obsessive attitude towards her relationship with Travis, even when she said she was fine moving on, all of this Travis could convey to a future prospect or to the community at large and prevent Jodi was moving freely based on the stories and image she wanted to project.

I agree about her need to be right and end up on top. That to me explains the way she killed Travis, the rest explains the why.

No doubt in my mind that the way and the why are unrelated. If all she intended to do was rid herself of an inconvenience so she could move on, she could have killed him as he slept...no pain, no mess, no doubt a lot less chance of incriminating evidence left behind.

I have always believed that she wanted Travis awake and aware when she struck. It was not enough to just end his life...she needed him to know that his life was ending and who was ending it.
 
I am not understanding how Travis dead was more convenient to her than Travis alive. He was no threat to her other than emotionally and the way I see it...she killed him because she always had to have the last word.

Arias is unable to let go, ever, of anything, unless on her terms. In court her answers rambled in her attempts to have the last word on as many subjects as possible. And she would try to taunt JM sometimes during questioning just to have the last word.

I think having the last word wherever possible gives Killer an enormous sense of satisfaction. It is, to me, why she was the way she was in court as well as in before and after trial interviews. And who will ever forget her final statement to the court at sentencing!

This killer had many opportunities to make things look better for herself, yet every single opportunity was missed because of her desperate need to have the last word, to say what she wants said regardless of how damaging it might be. I think the bulk of any problems she has while incarcerated are going to occur because of that need. And I think she sits in prison for the rest of her life because of that need.

IMO


Having to have the last word was why she had to stick it to the Alexanders during her sentencing- with the "fog" suddenly lifting and she clearly remembering Travis being conscious as she slit his throat. She didn't care at the that point if it meant she got no parole, she had nothing to lose. She should never have been allowed to speak, and certainly not after the Alexanders! (I guess the point is to see if the perp will express remorse).
 
No doubt in my mind that the way and the why are unrelated. If all she intended to do was rid herself of an inconvenience so she could move on, she could have killed him as he slept...no pain, no mess, no doubt a lot less chance of incriminating evidence left behind.

I have always believed that she wanted Travis awake and aware when she struck. It was not enough to just end his life...she needed him to know that his life was ending and who was ending it.

I agree. If it was just getting rid of him that mattered she could have sniped him from 300 yards. She wanted it to be personal, to reduce him to zero and her to the one holding his life in her hands and then snuffing it out like a bug. He thought he knew who she really was, she wanted to leave no doubt.
 
Exactly. You can't devalue what was never valued in the first place.

Oh, I believe he was of value to her at one time, just not as a person. Never as a person. More as a possession, or a means to a desired end. She did not cherish anyone in her life, ever, imo. She does not have the capacity for it.
 
Oh, I believe he was of value to her at one time, just not as a person. Never as a person. More as a possession, or a means to a desired end. She did not cherish anyone in her life, ever, imo. She does not have the capacity for it.

Exactly. No value per se, just value to her. When that ended, his value as a person was nowhere to be found.
 
Having to have the last word was why she had to stick it to the Alexanders during her sentencing- with the "fog" suddenly lifting and she clearly remembering Travis being conscious as she slit his throat. She didn't care at the that point if it meant she got no parole, she had nothing to lose. She should never have been allowed to speak, and certainly not after the Alexanders! (I guess the point is to see if the perp will express remorse).

I guess so. But in the case of Arias, it's a bad guess.
 
BBM. ITA, those were not cruel words, only when taken out of context.

Juan thought they were problematic to the extent that he knew he'd need to not hide from those statements by TA. He talked about it in his book. The statements (in any context) were absolutely cruel, even if JA totally deserved it. The words themselves were, by even the state's definiton, cruel. I know what I heard, I know what I read, and I know what Juan thought about it (because he told us in his book).
 
I didn't find what he said to her as abusive- she deserved every word for what she put him through, and not taking "No" for an answer. I would have said many of the same things myself to her, but much sooner on than he did. He tried for too long to be nice about it and she didn't take his hints. She would still have killed him, just maybe not then, but I still think finding Mimi's name on the Cancun ticket sealed the plan in her mind that she'd already made plans for.
I understand your opinion, but I also recognize that opinion is coming from a place of hatred for the murderess. I guarantee if someone called any one of us a "3 hole wonder," you would not find that to be complimentary, but crass and abusive, even if "it was deserved." Travis was a fully grown adult. He can own those words since he used them. Travis was *not* always nice, that's the truth and that's what made him a fallible human who still had some maturing to do. He knew it and talked about needing to work on himself. And also that same description was from people who loved him and knew him. Let's not sugarcoat the truth here, that doesn't serve Travis or the history of what happened. Travis didn't deserve to be murdered, but he did participate in that relationship, and he was part of the dysfunction. Even his friends say that. I won't pretend Travis was a complete bystander; how can anyone learn from any tragic situation unless the truth is looked at whether it's good, bad, or ugly? I know it hurts to think that an otherwise good guy could also have aspects to him that are not what we might consider to be 'good.' Travis' inner struggles and weaknesses (including his known temper) was a part of him and it was something that affected his relationships. In combination with the disordered Borderline hanger-on, it was toxic and tragic.
 
I understand your opinion, but I also recognize that opinion is coming from a place of hatred for the murderess. I guarantee if someone called any one of us a "3 hole wonder," you would not find that to be complimentary, but crass and abusive, even if "it was deserved." Travis was a fully grown adult. He can own those words since he used them. Travis was *not* always nice, that's the truth and that's what made him a fallible human who still had some maturing to do. He knew it and talked about needing to work on himself. And also that same description was from people who loved him and knew him. Let's not sugarcoat the truth here, that doesn't serve Travis or the history of what happened. Travis didn't deserve to be murdered, but he did participate in that relationship, and he was part of the dysfunction. Even his friends say that. I won't pretend Travis was a complete bystander; how can anyone learn from any tragic situation unless the truth is looked at whether it's good, bad, or ugly? I know it hurts to think that an otherwise good guy could also have aspects to him that are not what we might consider to be 'good.' Travis' inner struggles and weaknesses (including his known temper) was a part of him and it was something that affected his relationships. In combination with the disordered Borderline hanger-on, it was toxic and tragic.

He may have lost it on May 26, but his tolerance and forgiveness of her shenanigans during the rest of the relationship I'm pretty sure was more than I could have mustered.
 
I understand your opinion, but I also recognize that opinion is coming from a place of hatred for the murderess. I guarantee if someone called any one of us a "3 hole wonder," you would not find that to be complimentary, but crass and abusive, even if "it was deserved." Travis was a fully grown adult. He can own those words since he used them. Travis was *not* always nice, that's the truth and that's what made him a fallible human who still had some maturing to do. He knew it and talked about needing to work on himself. And also that same description was from people who loved him and knew him. Let's not sugarcoat the truth here, that doesn't serve Travis or the history of what happened. Travis didn't deserve to be murdered, but he did participate in that relationship, and he was part of the dysfunction. Even his friends say that. I won't pretend Travis was a complete bystander; how can anyone learn from any tragic situation unless the truth is looked at whether it's good, bad, or ugly? I know it hurts to think that an otherwise good guy could also have aspects to him that are not what we might consider to be 'good.' Travis' inner struggles and weaknesses (including his known temper) was a part of him and it was something that affected his relationships. In combination with the disordered Borderline hanger-on, it was toxic and tragic.


I stand by my opinion that what he said was not abusive and I think you are attributing qualities to me of other posters. I do not "hate" Jodi Arias nor do I think Travis was perfect or a saint. Danielle Van Dam's parents weren't perfect victims, and neither was Michael Jackson's last accuser- Gavin Arivizo and his mom. They don't deserve any less justice for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
436
Total visitors
540

Forum statistics

Threads
608,246
Messages
18,236,781
Members
234,325
Latest member
davenotwayne
Back
Top