Sentencing and beyond- Jodi Arias General Discussion #2

[Val1]

Maybe the $2500 brought JA's insurance current, so she had insurance when she rented the car in June, but not back when she was borrowing the BMW and attempting to rent the U-Haul to move?

I'm thinking perhaps the whole U-Haul thing was a way to try and scam the insurance company with TA's BMW(which she supposedly had an email to prove was "sold" to her). I bet she thought because he still had insurance on it she could use it to get the U-Haul. I wonder what the payout would have been if she'd been successful? Instead, iirc, she left it up to TA to take care of once her claim got refused. I'm pretty sure that was what she wanted to call a lawyer over in that argument and probably what TA meant when he said she'd "scammed" him.

 

[Val1]

I think it was MM too. As far as her crap. Exactly. She'd hone from owning a home (on paper anyway) to not even owning a bed. She probably had books and her "art," the potted plants she killed in the UHaul, and at least a couple piles of stuff she had stolen from Travis.

My guess is renting a UHaul was more about creating drama about a Big Move, and having an excuse to stay in Mesa every last minute she could, hoping Travis would throw himself in front of the UHaul and beg her to stay.

I sure don't remember anything about her having moved to Mesa with a U-Haul.... just a mention that TA had let her store a few boxes in his garage until she got settled. Iirc, JA(or someone... maybe it was a dream :thinking::gaah had said at one point that the day of the murder she had stopped in there and had been going through her boxes of stuff(including the one with the set of knives from her and DB's house) and slept in the car until the coast was clear.

 

[Val1]

It's so bizarre that she had "someone to handle her affairs." Who, in good health, has someone to "handle their affairs" at age 30? Bwahahaha! What "affairs" did she even have? She didn't own anything! No money..no dependents...

Maybe MM was her "manager"... though in other circles the description might not be quite so platonic.

 

[Colie]

I'm trying to get back in at Beth's site so I can back to the time before she went to Mesa. There is something about when she and Travis "broke up" that she fled to Big Sur and MM, and then moved to Mesa in August, and MM wasn't happy that she was moving there and told her so. He thought it was a bad idea.

I think in her journal September MM tells arias she needs professionally help.

 

[LinasK]

U-Hauls are surprisingly expensive. Plus, she had to have a truck and a dolly. I was recently quoted $3000 for a tiny truck cross country, without gas, so $2500 doesn't seem out of line to me.

The original plan might have been for Mom to drive the car and JA the truck. What do you think she could have had in that truck?[/QUOTE]

BBM In the truck? My guess is halter tops and hot chocolate soaked cell phones :scared:

Supposedly she had paintings stored in Travis's garage. Must have been a hell of alot of them or awfully large ones...

 

[LinasK]

Much as we hated them- Nurmi and Wilmott did their jobs and gave her the best defense they could. She has zero grounds for ineffective counsel. They would have had to both be sleeping during the trial for that to fly and it's rare for that to be granted. What "new" evidence could she possibly have? It's not like it was a whodunnit and she confessed and the evidence matched that she was there and the last person to see Travis alive. She had means, motive, and opportunity. Clearly, despite her gas cans, she was in Arizona when she claimed she wasn't.

And I forgot to add... they gave her the defense she wanted. I'm quite sure she was directing it, besides trashing Travis, they attacked Dr. DeMarte and Deanna, I'm sure Jodi insisted on it.

 

[LinasK]

I think this is the home the butcheress and DB lost. Lots of pics.




http://www.estately.com/sold/43755-virginia-avenue--10

That home is perfectly nice, and it'd be a steal in my area. Why wasn't it good enough for her???

 

[Val1]

Yes, it was in January. So why still be talking about four months later if it wasn't all that? She also writes during the January timeframe (IIRC) that Travis made love to her for the second time, and it was different, and he wanted it to be special.

My point was simply that those pics "proving" they'd had a "romp" the day of the murder were taken months before, as a few of us tried to point out.

 

[Val1]

That home is perfectly nice, and it'd be a steal in my area. Why wasn't it good enough for her???

I'm sure it would have been, if she didn't have to pay for it.

 

[LinasK]

You need steel-toed slippers!

Yes I do! I admit I'm klutzy, especially when I get in a hurry, I don't watch where I'm going.

 

[RickshawFan]

No sweet there, but it literally couldn't have been any shorter.

The entire reply is 2 sentences long:

COA judges 1, 2,and 3 have received your motion to reconsider. It is denied.

LOL.

There's no way the Perryville Princess can manipulate this response and nothing to hang an appeal on! No judges names, no reasons, just NO. These judges have figured out how to end-run Jodith Princess and they're PO-ed to boot. Wah, wah, wah.... It's the CofA version of TA's texts: one word of nothing. Still, she found ways to harass him with her nonsense in the very next minutes. Not here. Slap slap. Plus, the AZ SC might easily use the same sentence verbatim when Jodi tries to appeal to them: heck the CoA has already drafted the language for them!

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

Sooo, the tootsie pop pics were from Jan 2008 and not June, correct?

I do remember some talk about it looked like a tootsie pop in her hoohaw, and if that's is true then why was that picture on the camera if taken in January? I'm not going to look at that which cannot be unseen again, but if there is a brave soul ........ but how did that photo get on that camera for June 4th?

 

[Val1]

I do remember some talk about it looked like a tootsie pop in her hoohaw, and if that's is true then why was that picture on the camera if taken in January? I'm not going to look at that which cannot be unseen again, but if there is a brave soul ........ but how did that photo get on that camera for June 4th?

It was one of a bunch of previously deleted but recovered pics and there's still some question imo as to whether recovering(or perhaps having copied them onto the memory card, ie JA when messing with the camera on the lovesac) may have stamped the June date on them either by accident or on purpose. Also, the colour of her hair was not dark brown, like it was when she took those selfies in her car as she left Cali on her trip, it looks much more like what it was in those pics where she's seen in her white parka holding a camera(not quite blonde but definitely not dark brown).

Edit: These are some notes from the testimony of Melendez about the pics... first set are mine from watching the testimony, second are from wenwe4. I have no idea what order these were on the memory card, exhibit numbers don't always reflect the right order.

01-14-2013
---------------------------------
TA's camera had nothing in its internal memory.
Pics came from the Memory stick #215
Could not use write blocker on the memory stick. Had to use viewer to see images. Then forensically copied whole card to see all images.

Exh.#164-169 were all unallocated.
Encase is where the date came from on the pics(nudes) that showed a date.
Encase can fully recover deleted pics but cannot fully recover unallocated pics.
Blurry pics were from thumbnail pics.
Whatever the camera date had been set at is what gets printed on the pics when taken.
-----------------------------------
wenwe4:
Det . Melendez describes 5 part process to delete pics off camera memory stick - playback, menu, delete, select which pics to delete, then actual delete images selected.
A directed file that is deleted shows when it was taken and when deleted.
An unallocated space files may have only partial of the file and/or partial images
The blurry pics were thumbnails - when make them bigger they become blurry.
If the camera take thumbnail and a larger image . . . when you delete - the deleted ones may be overwritten but the thumbnail may have not been.

Exhibit #164 - #169 - female Defense Atty looks @ them . . . JA looks on -turns head slightly to get a better view.
Defense asks if they can approach . . . .

#164-169 are admitted . . . the dates and times are from Encase . . .

JA is bowing her head and trying not to look @ picture . . . but she strained to see them when Atty was holding the pics.

Image of a female
#166 - image of a male = bottle of personal KY lubricant - 6/4/08
#165 - 6/4/08 - 1:44 pm
#167 = foreground . . . can't make it out

Why so blurry? that is a thumbnail . . . .the larger the picture the smaller you make it loooks more clear - but small to make bigger becomes blurry due to pixelation.
Unallocated clusters - unable to locate a date and time."
------------------------------------------------------------

 

[RickshawFan]

I do remember some talk about it looked like a tootsie pop in her hoohaw, and if that's is true then why was that picture on the camera if taken in January? I'm not going to look at that which cannot be unseen again, but if there is a brave soul ........ but how did that photo get on that camera for June 4th?

I never saw those compromising photos because they have all been redacted. I have heard rumors of extraordinary body parts, but that's all. How did you guys see all this stuff? If you tell me, I'll volunteer to "play doctor".

 

[Dmacky]

Oh to be a fly on her cell wall. Or the gopher/gofer underneath it.

I haven't checked in since the goddess took her last/final road trip (with no gas cans) to Perryville. We sure had a great bunch of posters here!
BBM ~Thank you pink for giving me a much needed chuckle this morning. LOL

 

[atthelake]

I haven't checked in since the goddess took her last/final road trip (with no gas cans) to Perryville. We sure had a great bunch of posters here!
BBM ~Thank you pink for giving me a much needed chuckle this morning. LOL

:seeya:

 

[Dmacky]

I never saw those compromising photos because they have all been redacted. I have heard rumors of extraordinary body parts, but that's all. How did you guys see all this stuff? If you tell me, I'll volunteer to "play doctor".

Rickshaw ~ Believe me you are far better off by NOT seeing them. Once you do, they can never EVER be unseen. Were talkin the not Not-So Grand Canyon.
[video=youtube;fyz21LVPYaQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyz21LVPYaQ[/video]

The sex tape and all those pictures are the only reason that so many of "her" followers were/are men. It had/has nothing to do with her "innocence" as they are claiming. I'll bet **"Ransom's husbands shoes" that they all have 8x10 glossy's of them.

** I can't remember who came up with that after the poster "Ransom" said she would bet her husbands shoes on something.

Does anyone remember who keep betting the shoes later? He/she was a hoot!

 

[geevee]

I never saw those compromising photos because they have all been redacted. I have heard rumors of extraordinary body parts, but that's all. How did you guys see all this stuff? If you tell me, I'll volunteer to "play doctor".

Are they redacted from TawniDilly's video of that day (was it Day 3?)? Check the end of that video as I recall they had been addended there last time I watched it. I think I have the whole set of them so if you *really* want to see them and can't find otherwise let me know, I'll send you whatever I have.

 

[Hatfield]

I Don't see how AZ can afford to spend this kind of money on all their murder defendants. CMJA costs the taxpayers over three million dollars for her trials and we all know appeals cost lots of money but how can AZ justify spending another three million on this convicted murderess and not on their other convicts? If I was an AZ taxpayer I would start a campaign to stop this over spending. Most people don't have millions to spend on their defense so why should the taxpayers pay it out for her? She wasn't even an AZ resident. She was living in CA.
In her journal on Aug 1, she talks about not blaming others for your situation, she says you can take the road of blame or the road of responsibility. Can you believe that??? She even says you are responsible for your situation because of the choices you made. Why didn't Juan Martinez show that in court? This woman blames everyone else but herself. She even blames the Alexanders for the length of the two trials because she was trying to settle. Even that half bald Attorney of hers said that. But they failed to say it was a settlement for 2nd degree not 1st degree. Someone needs to remind that idiot what she wrote in her own journal.

Totally Agree.

Why cant a judge just start stamping "DENIED" on all these motions and appeals and quit spending any more money on her.

I don't understand how she was able to get so much preferential treatment with the cost of her lawyers. It does need to stop now. Taxpayer money is being waisted from this point on.
Just deny and stamp everything with a standard reason like "Denied due to insufficient evidence".

Im all for peple getting a fair trial and fair representation. She got all that. Its time to stop giving her anymore.

 

[Hope4More]

My point was simply that those pics "proving" they'd had a "romp" the day of the murder were taken months before, as a few of us tried to point out.

Still don't agree. Forget looking for tootsie rolls (shudder) where the sun shines more than it should (PTSD! flashback to seeing that gaping hole).

If nothing else.....I think both of them had a pretty good time during the tootsie pop romp. The pics that were taken(or allegedly taken) on June 4 IMO show 2 people having anything other than fun. Both look almost grim.