Sentencing and beyond- Jodi Arias General Discussion #4

[Val1]

Stand by it. By all means. But you said it wasn't the same bottle. You didn't answer the question of what that means for the photos. Two sets of photos or two bottles of whatever in the same location of the same set of photos?

All it means is that I don't believe all those pics were taken within the same five minutes or so, as claimed.

 

[wasnt_me]

All it means is that I don't believe all those pics were taken within the same five minutes or so, as claimed.

Okay. with a totally different bottle of "something."

 

[Hope4More]

That's not correct. It was March 18 or 19 and Travis set a trap for zack because Zack might have been using the BMW while Travis was in OKC. This happened right after Travis returned from convention.

Your assumption that Zach might have or that Travis thought he might have. Travis never said so. He just was baffled why Zach's camera was in his car, on top of a lot of other strange things going on in his house.

 

[pocketaccent]

AAARGHH! my internet is so slow. Can't post, Can't reply.

 

[Hope4More]

I explained in my post that exact same thing and provided Dworkin's paperwork. It speaks for itself, doesn't it?

The original problem was people were saying there was NO video with what Jodi described. Here it is with the exact same Youtube ID.

ETA--I have figured out how to explain this link problem to you below. scroll to the next post.

I don't remember anyone saying that the video the killer says she watched didn't/doesn't exist. The debate is whether or not she watched ANY video with Travis. If the video she described wasn't watched by Travis, then she obviously didn't.

You believe (as I understand it) that she did watch videos with Travis, and did have sex with him, and that the timestamps on pics are accurate, or close enough.

Maybe that is all correct. But...maybe it's not, in total or in part.

Of all the pieces about what happened, IMO it is least defensible that she watched videos- any, of any kind- with Travis. IMO the timeline doesn't support that, the computer activity doesn't support that, and more subjectively, the psychology of what was going on between the two of them doesn't support that. Jmo.

 

[Hope4More]

Saving myself the time of refinding what I read a bit ago from her testimony, and cutting and pasting.

To summarize: her testimony is that she parked in the driveway, entered his house through "the laundry room," that he didn't hear her come in, that she went to his office, that she stood in the doorway without either Naps or Travis noticing she was there, that his back was to her, and that he was on his computer already watching a video (tinfoil hats).

After he noticed her and was happy to see her and Naps noticed her and was suddenly so excited he was going around in circles, they watched videos- plural- together. Tin foil hats. No other video described or alluded to.

Then she told him she was exhausted and wanted to sleep and he told her fine; neither expressed any "intentions" about sex, they went to bed and woke up around 1pm. (Phone interview)

Same story on the stand, except ...Travis says he wants to have sex and is disappointed when she says she's tired from driving. But they go to bed and....

 

[Hope4More]

Okay. with a totally different bottle of "something."

(Ugh). KY apparently wasn't TA's lubricant of choice when he was by himself. So, two different types of bottles on his bed isn't particularly far-fetched, leaving everything else aside for the moment.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

On the butcheress' support site they have KN's book transcribed in its entirety. I'm not sure that's legal but oh well. I'm sure someone has let Nurmi know by now. I know SS have been captured by quite a few onliners. LMAO

 

[wasnt_me]

4:08:11AM

--Travis is in the middle of watching or has just watched video lLYD_-A_X5E. On that same page, he sees another video he wants to watch. He clicks on that video and the computer stores this information:

youtube.com/watch?v=ILYD_-A_X5E&feature=related

Dworkin's record explains that his browser "requested" a related video, taking it from the feature video "IlYD" to the "related" video. The related video seems to be:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG5EsSLSXP8&NR=1

So what the browser history is telling us is that he stopped watching "ILYD" at 4:08 and started watching "gG5E."

This video is 2:12 seconds long, but there are 2 minutes and 58 seconds between this request and the next request (if I remember how to add time.)

4:11:04am, he clicked another side link for get another video related to the original feature, "ILYD."

The browser request looks this:

(Go From)

youtube.com/watch?v=ILYD_-A_X5E&feature=related

(Go to)

youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw&feature=related

That sound have landed him here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw

This video is 3:44 in length. (Travis was jamming. I like this song.)

4:15:13am Travis makes another request:

Go From:

youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw&feature=related

Go to:

youtube.com/watch?v=alqM0IYeH54&NR=1

This video is 2:49 in length.

We are also told through testimony with Dworkin reading it:

4:24:00am

https://www.youtube.com. Title of the video: Free webproxity-air-proxy.com

4:30:27am--mail.google.com

4:33:55am--www.travisalexander.net/page@2.googlesyncgooglesyndication.com (don't know if this link will work)

4:35:45am--www.travisalexander.net (Willmott didn't want him to read the path.)

The only thing I can't figure out is why there's no "feature=related" for the "gG5E" video, but it could be that it just wasn't viewable as the lawyers pushed the papers around on the projector. I don't know.

The implications are that Travis had just finished the "IYLD" video at 4:08am, and none of the links that have feature=related on the end come up on my screen. I believe it's because it's a log of the computer's and not an active link. That's only a guess, though. I wish they had given us his activity before 4:08am.

I really hope this explains it but my posts get ignored anyways, so....

 

[GigiG]

To anyone with a KOC subscription:

There is a post from someone on State vs Jodi Arias (fb) that says JA's first text to Travis was dated 02/01/06, with her telling him that she "needs his help."

This would have been months before the met at the PPL convention.

Is this true? TIA

 

[wasnt_me]

(Ugh). KY apparently wasn't TA's lubricant of choice when he was by himself. So, two different types of bottles on his bed isn't particularly far-fetched, leaving everything else aside for the moment.

Are you growling at me?

Travis can't be by himself and then be in the same photos with Jodi. And it would make more logical sense then for both bottles, if there were indeed two bottles, to be in the pictures. But you are perfectly welcome to believe anything you want to believe. I believe there was only one bottle of lubricant, one set of pics, and they were taken on June 4th exactly like the embedded metadata says they were.

It makes more sense than creating excuses to make another theory work or decide Travis likes a lubricant other than the one Jodi trained him on.

 

[Hope4More]

To anyone with a KOC subscription:

There is a post from someone on State vs Jodi Arias (fb) that says JA's first text to Travis was dated 02/01/06, with her telling him that she "needs his help."

This would have been months before the met at the PPL convention.

Is this true? TIA

BK has all of TA's texts from Dec 2007-June 2008. No others.

No texts from that early on were ever referred to at trial. I guess I'd be surprised if such a text really exists, given by all accounts Travis first met/heard of his killer months later.

 

[Hope4More]

Are you growling at me?

Travis can't be by himself and then be in the same photos with Jodi. And it would make more logical sense then for both bottles, if there were indeed two bottles, to be in the pictures. But you are perfectly welcome to believe anything you want to believe. I believe there was only one bottle of lubricant, one set of pics, and they were taken on June 4th exactly like the embedded metadata says they were.

It makes more sense than creating excuses to make another theory work or decide Travis likes a lubricant other than the one Jodi trained him on.

No, silly. The UGH stems from my distaste in discussing such entirely private and personal matters that none of us should ever have been privy to but are, thanks to his depraved and malicious murderer.

FWIW, I have no interest in creating excuses to believe in one theory or another about any aspect of this. My thoughts change and keep changing, as I'm sure is evidenced in my entirely inconsistent posts.

What I'm sure of is that there is a lot more to the story than was told at trial, especially about what did and did not happen on June 4.

The way my mind works is to acknowledge that I don't know, then to move pieces around to see if they do or do not fit. We've learned a great deal from the texts, so I've had a lot of pieces to move around.

I'm sure at one point or another I've disagreed with everyone here about one piece or more- likely the more end of things.

I rejected until very recently the idea the pic timestamps were inaccurate or that the 2 didn't have sex, but I've been increasingly open to that possibility since reading all the texts, because the assumptions I made about TA's frame of mind seem to have been proven quite inaccurate.

 

[wasnt_me]

Your assumption that Zach might have or that Travis thought he might have. Travis never said so. He just was baffled why Zach's camera was in his car, on top of a lot of other strange things going on in his house.

No, I'm not assuming anything. Travis said in his journal that he intended to put the camera in that car in Zack's view and hide the key and then Zack would have explaining to do.

Of course I'm guessing at Travis' motive, just as you plainly said all your subjective theories are just that. The problem is, people think all these guesses and theories are fact.

What is your guess at why Travis wants to set Zack up?

And as I read it, Zack can't find his camera. Travis wonders why it was in Travis' car. Travis just got back from a trip, which I do have to assume he took the new car, but I honestly don't know when he bought it. But if he had the new car, his BMW was at home the whole time. It's not a stretch that Zack drove it without permission -- if Travis was in the new car or a rented car for the trip.

 

[geevee]

Are you growling at me?

Travis can't be by himself and then be in the same photos with Jodi. And it would make more logical sense then for both bottles, if there were indeed two bottles, to be in the pictures. But you are perfectly welcome to believe anything you want to believe. I believe there was only one bottle of lubricant, one set of pics, and they were taken on June 4th exactly like the embedded metadata says they were.

It makes more sense than creating excuses to make another theory work or decide Travis likes a lubricant other than the one Jodi trained him on.

BBM

Not to be argumentative but when is Travis in the same picture with JA?

 

[wasnt_me]

BBM

Not to be argumentative but when is Travis in the same picture with JA?

Who's taking the pictures of each of them? Jodi isn't taking a selfie above herself.

This is what I will do. I will go ahead and let you guys have the thread because obviously nothing I say is of value.

 

[Hope4More]

No, I'm not assuming anything. Travis said in his journal that he intended to put the camera in that car in Zack's view and hide the key and then Zack would have explaining to do.

Of course I'm guessing at Travis' motive, just as you plainly said all your subjective theories are just that. The problem is, people think all these guesses and theories are fact.

What is your guess at why Travis wants to set Zack up?

And as I read it, Zack can't find his camera. Travis wonders why it was in Travis' car. Travis just got back from a trip, which I do have to assume he took the new car, but I honestly don't know when he bought it. But if he had the new car, his BMW was at home the whole time. It's not a stretch that Zack drove it without permission -- if Travis was in the new car or a rented car for the trip.

My guess is that Travis was feeling very off balance, disturbed, and angry by the never ending stress and strangeness of having that psycho in his life.

He links the camera oddness with his "lost" journal and diamond ring and iirc, a computer or some such, and seems to have at least a vague sense that's he's being messed with.

I think he found it far easier to believe Zach might be the culprit than to accept what for us is the obvious.



And personally, no, I don't believe for a minute that Zach would have driven T's car without permission.

 

[Val1]

4:08:11AM

--Travis is in the middle of watching or has just watched video lLYD_-A_X5E. On that same page, he sees another video he wants to watch. He clicks on that video and the computer stores this information:

youtube.com/watch?v=ILYD_-A_X5E&feature=related

Dworkin's record explains that his browser "requested" a related video, taking it from the feature video "IlYD" to the "related" video. The related video seems to be:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG5EsSLSXP8&NR=1

So what the browser history is telling us is that he stopped watching "ILYD" at 4:08 and started watching "gG5E."

This video is 2:12 seconds long, but there are 2 minutes and 58 seconds between this request and the next request (if I remember how to add time.)

4:11:04am, he clicked another side link for get another video related to the original feature, "ILYD."

The browser request looks this:

(Go From)

youtube.com/watch?v=ILYD_-A_X5E&feature=related

(Go to)

youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw&feature=related

That sound have landed him here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw

This video is 3:44 in length. (Travis was jamming. I like this song.)

4:15:13am Travis makes another request:

Go From:

youtube.com/watch?v=K2cYWfq--Nw&feature=related

Go to:

youtube.com/watch?v=alqM0IYeH54&NR=1

This video is 2:49 in length.

We are also told through testimony with Dworkin reading it:

4:24:00am

https://www.youtube.com. Title of the video: Free webproxity-air-proxy.com

4:30:27am--mail.google.com

4:33:55am--www.travisalexander.net/page@2.googlesyncgooglesyndication.com (don't know if this link will work)

4:35:45am--www.travisalexander.net (Willmott didn't want him to read the path.)

The only thing I can't figure out is why there's no "feature=related" for the "gG5E" video, but it could be that it just wasn't viewable as the lawyers pushed the papers around on the projector. I don't know.

The implications are that Travis had just finished the "IYLD" video at 4:08am, and none of the links that have feature=related on the end come up on my screen. I believe it's because it's a log of the computer's and not an active link. That's only a guess, though. I wish they had given us his activity before 4:08am.

I really hope this explains it but my posts get ignored anyways, so....

Not ignored by me, though I don't always agree with them and often need some time to digest or verify them.

I'm actually more interested in the fact that JA was into buying and selling domains and suddenly a web proxy shows up that is used to not only funnel clicks into/onto different sites but lets you browse anonymously and then it goes to TA's gmail account where we know from testimony that the airlines receipt had been opened/read and then it diverts to TA's blog site but JW doesn't want the path read... hmmm.

 

[Hope4More]

A little tidbit I came across while putting together the timeline I'm working on.


Ryan Burns testified the killer told him she was responsible for helping make Travis a PPL Executive Director, and for helping him retain that status.

Burns testified as well that only Executive Directors were eligible for perks such as....the Cancun trip.

Not much of a stretch to think that whacko believed she DESERVED to go to Cancun, because without her magnificent contributions Travis wouldn't even have been eligible to go.

 

[Val1]

To anyone with a KOC subscription:

There is a post from someone on State vs Jodi Arias (fb) that says JA's first text to Travis was dated 02/01/06, with her telling him that she "needs his help."

This would have been months before the met at the PPL convention.

Is this true? TIA

That would be news to me, she allegedly didn't even get the PPL cd from some random person until March '06 iirc.