SIDEBAR #41 - Arias/Alexander forum

[Bernina]

BBM What does this mean? Bystander is MDLR on the JAII site? How do you know?

If you back track to the original question, and then snag the tweet I posted (a few days back) a tweeter was outing MDLR as "Bystander" on JAII.

 

[RickshawFan]

I have just been taking a second look at Flores' interrogation of Jodi on July 15, 2008.

1) It's astonishing how few questions Flores asks! Instead, Jodi keeps trying to head him off at the pass by anticipating what he's going to wonder about next. She burbles on and on, compulsively hiding her tracks when it isn't even obvious yet from Flores that she needs to! See, for instance, Video #2 (David Lohr), where Flores asks her what she did on her trip in June. She quickly dispenses with the Santa Cruz and LA area stuff, and then launches into a lengthy spiel about interstates and getting lost and the 40 and the 15 and a map with states on it and how many hundreds of miles she still was away from Phoenix....... None of this stuff answers any question on the table. JA just assumes Flores is going to go there, but maybe that wasn't even his plan.....
2) I've assumed all along that there was no "boyfriend/girlfriend" relationship, that most of the detail is fantasy spun from Jodi's mouth. Keeping that in mind, her obsession with Travis during that interview is startlingly obvious. She piles detail on detail (e.g. Video #1 and #2) without any prompting. Just chilling.....

I'm gonna keep watching for a bit, so I can get my jollies all over again when she's required to go to the bathroom with a deputy present. I also love when she eats the sandwich. She picks at it, gags, tosses it around and leave most of it. To think, that was her last non-jail food, and it was just all so beneath her. She'll never get to eat something that nice again, and I'm sure it was very mediocre. Bwahahaha!

Do y'all have other favorite parts?

 

[YESorNO]

Talk about injustice :sigh:

Casey Anthony's attorney should not receive bankruptcy settlement money, trustees say

"...A bankruptcy judge ruled in 2013 that Anthony would not have to pay many of her creditors, but that ruling was not clear how much she would have to pay."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...thony-bankruptcy-payments-20150207-story.html

 

[RickshawFan]

Oops...

 

[YESorNO]

I have just been taking a second look at Flores' interrogation of Jodi on July 15, 2008.

1) It's astonishing how few questions Flores asks! Instead, Jodi keeps trying to head him off at the pass by anticipating what he's going to wonder about next. She burbles on and on, compulsively hiding her tracks when it isn't even obvious yet from Flores that she needs to! See, for instance, Video #2 (David Lohr), where Flores asks her what she did on her trip in June. She quickly dispenses with the Santa Cruz and LA area stuff, and then launches into a lengthy spiel about interstates and getting lost and the 40 and the 15 and a map with states on it and how many hundreds of miles she still was away from Phoenix....... None of this stuff answers any question on the table. JA just assumes Flores is going to go there, but maybe that wasn't even his plan.....
2) I've assumed all along that there was no "boyfriend/girlfriend" relationship, that most of the detail is fantasy spun from Jodi's mouth. Keeping that in mind, her obsession with Travis during that interview is startlingly obvious. She piles detail on detail (e.g. Video #1 and #2) without any prompting. Just chilling.....

I'm gonna keep watching for a bit, so I can get my jollies all over again when she's required to go to the bathroom with a deputy present. I also love when she eats the sandwich. She picks at it, gags, tosses it around and leave most of it. To think, that was her last non-jail food, and it was just all so beneath her. She'll never get to eat something that nice again, and I'm sure it was very mediocre. Bwahahaha!

Do y'all have other favorite parts?

No favorite part of the interro tapes, but this is my very favorite part where she is so surprise that she intakes a breath- just priceless, IMO.

[video=youtube;ap-mJEeKZQA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap-mJEeKZQA[/video]

 

[YESorNO]

The Thorn Birds author Colleen McCullough dies on Norfolk Island

"COLLEEN McCullough, Australia’s best selling author, was a charmer. Plain of feature, and certainly overweight, she was, nevertheless, a woman of wit and warmth. In one interview, she said: “I’ve never been into clothes or figure and the interesting thing is I never had any trouble attracting men.”..."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/art...201243185?nk=330faa4a8e5415da686d1b23ca56bfca

Whoever wrote this obituary needs to be :bigstick: , IMO and others are just as outraged:

Celebrated Author & Neuroscientist Colleen Mccullough Slammed in Sexist Obituary

"...Following the release of The Australian’s obituary, the twitterverse exploded with backlash and the hashtag #everydaysexism..."

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/02...olleen-mccullough-slammed-in-sexist-obituary/
----

I just loved her books The Thornbirds, Tim, and The Ladies of Missalonghi.

I can't state my outrage any better than what was said in the 2nd article I posted:

"...Clinical psychologist Dr. Sheela Raja says the obituary is a sad commentary on what society values in women. “We try to teach our girls that what matters is how you treat others, and if you create a life of purpose and meaning,“ Raja said. “This kind of message just reinforces that if you weren’t born looking a certain way, then your other accomplishments are somehow smaller and less valuable.”..."

Just unbelievable- I'm so :stormingmad:

RIP :candle: sweet lady

Link: https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/...v1B4wnNiOci4TH6HF7ukWPND1AbZgb18ZG5L56m2KHHYQ

ETA: As a school student ...Holy Cross College, Woollahra, NSW:

Link: https://alkagirdhar.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/265211-b0ab4266-a786-11e4-aef8-6051c59c143f.jpg

 

[samspace070]

BBM The embellishments are just his feeling, IMO.

I think he may be writing another book about this case and as a result, he may add some embellishments for a more interesting read. Some people who have not followed
the trial, as we do, that buy the book, may not realize that everything said or noted is not what we think happened at the trial and will accept these little embellishments as facts.
So be it- it will still be a very interesting book because he writes so well and the majority of what he writes is indeed fact- just as he sees the facts- may not be what we consider facts tho'.

All :moo:

I trust what Paul says a lot more than BK, Monica L or all those other TV news reporters. They are the ones that embellish in my opinion.

 

[samspace070]

I have a very difficult time with Paul Sanders' writing. He invents so much and passes it off as authoritative. How does he know what jurors are thinking? Give me a break! He cannot be in anyone else's head. And then there are the frou frou filler descriptions that don't describe what is actually there but something he imagines; and they are so syrupy and awkward. What the heck is an "aroma of manipulation"? That doesn't even make any sense: there are times I just want to barf.

I think the 13th Juror is an interesting concept, it's just that the execution is execrable.

You have a right to your opinion but so do the rest of us, and I for one find his description of the trial refreshing compared to the news people like BK and ML and MK. I would rather believe what he THINKS than what they do. So far nothing he has said has been refuted by any concrete evidence. He's my hero in this trial.

 

[neesaki]

Medical Mystery: All Signs Point to a Heart Attack, But the Tests Say NO:

http://tablet.washingtonpost.com/to...856bf6-8b8a-11e4-8ff4-fb93129c9c8b_story.html

Thought this was very interesting and a warning for everyone.

Licorice ? I can't stand it, never dreamed anyone else liked it so much that they could eat that much of it. I mean she ate a lot of licorice ! :scared: How weird... yet strange and interesting... guess one never knows.

 

[samspace070]

Paul Sanders is awesome, IMO. And he said at the very beginning that being a former juror he could get a feel for what the jurors are going through and what they think. The DeVault and Arias cases are so similar too. So wo better to write the column? I love reading it!!!

I am with you Curious in Indiana. I read Paul Sanders columns and posts before any others. He, more than those news people, know what the jurors are thinking. I have never been on a jury and have no idea what it is like, but he has and a murder trial of a deviant woman besides. His description of Nurmee is perfect. Also his comments on the other two drs is spot on. NO ONE wants to hear from them again. Paul is my HERO.

 

[samspace070]

Idk, but I have to agree with the "outward manifestation of a falsehood and her aroma of manipulation". He hit the nail on the head there, as far as I'm concerned. JMO
Oh, and Re: his embellishments, I actually appreciate them, I think his creativity is something that is just a part of him, that is just his style.... an excellent contrast to the super extreme monotonous boredom of the Nurmi. He certainly makes it sound more interesting, and gives us food for thought, as well as a view from a jurors perspective. JMO of course. :wave:

I am with you Neesaki, he gives definition to the proceedings. More than anyone else reporting on this trial. Like yu I enjoy getting a perspective from a former juror that is articulate and factual, if he uses a literary interpretation on it so much the better, like you say he makes it more interesting. This whole trial is so boring with all the sidebars and objections from the (?) DT, Paul brings us some high spots with his narrative. I love it when Juan is on and Paul is so complementary about him. IMO he is WONDERFUL

 

[samspace070]

I love this post. I agree with you. Nobody knows what the jurors are thinking.

I am really shocked that so many poster here are trashing Paul.:thinking: I think it's mean spirited and it makes me sad

 

[neesaki]

Someone said on the resentencing thread that Dr D couldn't being in a diagnosis of Psychopathy because she didn't give that diagnosis in the first trial. But iirc, Dr D did state in the first trial that Jodi tested high for psychopathic deviance. So why can't she speak to that now? I don't understand.

I remember that too, Curious. Not sure why that isn't being allowed here. In this phase I thought anything was open game. What's with that ?

 

[RickshawFan]

BBM The embellishments are just his feeling, IMO.

I think he may be writing another book about this case and as a result, he may add some embellishments for a more interesting read. Some people who have not followed
the trial, as we do, that buy the book, may not realize that everything said or noted is not what we think happened at the trial and will accept these little embellishments as facts.
So be it- it will still be a very interesting book because he writes so well and the majority of what he writes is indeed fact- just as he sees the facts- may not be what we consider facts tho'.

All :moo:

Agree: there is a whole lot of fiction going on in Paul Sanders' writing. It comes out of his imagination. And the fictions will be misunderstood by many as being facts.
One of my favorite "true crime" writers is Ann Rule. There is not so much fiction going on in her books as in Sanders' blog because she researches every thing thoroughly. It would be possible to check out her details against what is documented. She also interviews participants and attends the relevant trials. Nonetheless, the genre of "true crime" is considered to be not entirely non-fiction. It is considered to be infotainment. There is always an element of speculation in it, but some authors speculate way more than others. You can't get in someone else's head and say what they are thinking without being speculative, because you have absolutely no way to know what someone else is thinking: these elements are not fact, period. IMO, Ann Rule does a very good job with the genre.
I liken "true crime" to "historical novels". A writer of historical novels starts with research and then embellishes with details that are not at all in the historical record. The best writers of historical novels do a lot of research to arrive at as many facts as they can muster. They very commonly make up conversations between the characters and they develop plot lines as one might a novel. But everyone understands these are not factual: they have merely an element of fact.
So, I find "true crime" writers more credible, the more research, interviews, and first-hand information they use. I really appreciate data points! And I don't like it when authors try to pass off fiction as fact. Some writers on the Jodi Arias trial are way more speculative than others.
BK, in my opinion, bends over backwards to present facts—often verbatim—and analysis. This is squarely in the non-fiction category. You might not agree with her analysis and there might be occasional bias in her writing (there is bias in everyone's writing), but her work would not be considered at all fiction, or "embellished" or infotainment. She would never say something like "aroma of manipulation" (in addition to which, manipulation is an abstract concept and cannot impart vaguely pleasant-smelling droplets to the nose), because that phrase is impressionistic, not analytical.

 

[neesaki]

I hear ya, Dmacky. It took me days to catch up after last week.

With ya, I'm still not caught up, may never be :/

 

[samspace070]

Agree: there is a whole lot of fiction going on in Paul Sanders' writing. It comes out of his imagination. And the fictions will be misunderstood by many as being facts.
One of my favorite "true crime" writers is Ann Rule. There is not so much fiction going on in her books as in Sanders' blog because she researches every thing thoroughly. It would be possible to check out her details against what is documented. She also interviews participants and attends the relevant trials. Nonetheless, the genre of "true crime" is considered to be not entirely non-fiction. It is considered to be infotainment. There is always an element of speculation in it, but some authors speculate way more than others. You can't get in someone else's head and say what they are thinking without being speculative, because you have absolutely no way to know what someone else is thinking: these elements are not fact, period. IMO, Ann Rule does a very good job with the genre.
I liken "true crime" to "historical novels". A writer of historical novels starts with research and then embellishes with details that are not at all in the historical record. The best writers of historical novels do a lot of research to arrive at as many facts as they can muster. They very commonly make up conversations between the characters and they develop plot lines as one might a novel. But everyone understands these are not factual: they have merely an element of fact.
So, I find "true crime" writers more credible, the more research, interviews, and first-hand information they use. I really appreciate data points! And I don't like it when authors try to pass off fiction as fact. Some writers on the Jodi Arias trial are way more speculative than others.
BK, in my opinion, bends over backwards to present facts—often verbatim—and analysis. This is squarely in the non-fiction category. You might not agree with her analysis and there might be occasional bias in her writing (there is bias in everyone's writing), but her work would not be considered at all fiction, or "embellished" or infotainment. She would never say something like "aroma of manipulation" (in addition to which, manipulation is an abstract concept and cannot impart vaguely pleasant-smelling droplets to the nose), because that phrase is impressionistic, not analytical.

I perfer reading Pauls blog and posting rather than a dry brief with no ADJECTIVES, to describe the content. Paul makes the trial come to life with his so called embellishments, his book "Brain Damage" is listed a non-fiction and it is a wonderful book. I for one don't like Ann Rule but that is my personal opinion, no offense meant. I just don't understand why so many on this site demean Paul If you don't like him then don't read his posts, it's just that simple. I don't like Ann Rule and I don't waste precious time reading anything she writes, just like I don't like BK or ML or MK and I don't read anything they have to say. But I don't wax on and on about how terrible I think they are for the incorrect facts they put out. Just saying, I am confused about the Mean spirited attacks on this man.

 

[neesaki]

Talk about injustice :sigh:

Casey Anthony's attorney should not receive bankruptcy settlement money, trustees say

"...A bankruptcy judge ruled in 2013 that Anthony would not have to pay many of her creditors, but that ruling was not clear how much she would have to pay."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...thony-bankruptcy-payments-20150207-story.html

Amazing, especially this:

Baez claimed that he was owed $397,431, the largest amount in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.

Can you believe it ? Baez actually thinks he should recoup this huge sum? Ha ! ... He just needs to face it, not only did he go all out and show what a disgrace he is to the legal community, he also represented his lying, sociopath of a client for free, to the extent that he concocted nothing but a fairy tale defense for his psychopath killer client ... Face it, it's also known as ProBono, Baez ! You're nothing but a snake oil salesman and a scalawag. Time to get over it.

 

[RickshawFan]

I perfer reading Pauls blog and posting rather than a dry brief with no ADJECTIVES, to describe the content. Paul makes the trial come to life with his so called embellishments, his book "Brain Damage" is listed a non-fiction and it is a wonderful book. I for one don't like Ann Rule but that is my personal opinion, no offense meant. I just don't understand why so many on this site demean Paul If you don't like him then don't read his posts, it's just that simple. I don't like Ann Rule and I don't waste precious time reading anything she writes, just like I don't like BK or ML or MK and I don't read anything they have to say. But I don't wax on and on about how terrible I think they are for the incorrect facts they put out. Just saying, I am confused about the Mean spirited attacks on this man.

I, for one, am not being mean-spirited, nor have I seen anything mean-spirited about Paul Sanders in this forum. I have backed up my statements with examples. I have indicated that I have a strong personal preference for "data points." I have a strong preference (because of my training) for writers who use words precisely, no matter the genre. (I evaluate attorneys likewise, incidentally, e.g. JM versus KN and JW.) I have not said anything is incorrect: I have said some writers are much more speculative than others. And I have made clear in a previous post that "true crime" and "historical novels" are classified as "non-fiction" but are supposed to be assumed by the reader as speculative: neither genre is non-fiction in the sense that history or a book on the brain chemistry of serial killers are. Therefore, books in both genres (TC and HN) will generally feature a disclaimer in the frontispiece so no one gets confused.

By the way, I enjoy and appreciate the speculation in this forum, but there is also not much confusion about what is speculation and what is fact, what is ornamental description and what is analysis of testimony.

I have read two of Paul Sanders' Facebook posts and one in Really Big Mean Dog; they are not to my taste, but they may be to someone else's. I gave up entirely when I saw the phrase "aroma of manipulation." That's a non-starter for me, because it is inaccurate in the usage of "aroma" and the fact that aroma in the courtroom is much more likely to be emanating from the person sitting next to you, as in someone who gives off a vague smell of roses or garlic: no more, thank you.

 

[neesaki]

The Thorn Birds author Colleen McCullough dies on Norfolk Island

"COLLEEN McCullough, Australia’s best selling author, was a charmer. Plain of feature, and certainly overweight, she was, nevertheless, a woman of wit and warmth. In one interview, she said: “I’ve never been into clothes or figure and the interesting thing is I never had any trouble attracting men.”..."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/art...201243185?nk=330faa4a8e5415da686d1b23ca56bfca

Whoever wrote this obituary needs to be :bigstick: , IMO and others are just as outraged:

Celebrated Author & Neuroscientist Colleen Mccullough Slammed in Sexist Obituary

"...Following the release of The Australian’s obituary, the twitterverse exploded with backlash and the hashtag #everydaysexism..."

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/02...olleen-mccullough-slammed-in-sexist-obituary/
----

I just loved her books The Thornbirds, Tim, and The Ladies of Missalonghi.

I can't state my outrage any better than what was said in the 2nd article I posted:

"...Clinical psychologist Dr. Sheela Raja says the obituary is a sad commentary on what society values in women. “We try to teach our girls that what matters is how you treat others, and if you create a life of purpose and meaning,“ Raja said. “This kind of message just reinforces that if you weren’t born looking a certain way, then your other accomplishments are somehow smaller and less valuable.”..."

Just unbelievable- I'm so :stormingmad:

RIP :candle: sweet lady

Link: https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/...v1B4wnNiOci4TH6HF7ukWPND1AbZgb18ZG5L56m2KHHYQ

ETA: As a school student ...Holy Cross College, Woollahra, NSW:

Link: https://alkagirdhar.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/265211-b0ab4266-a786-11e4-aef8-6051c59c143f.jpg

Shameful what our society has become, thoroughly disgusting.

 

[YESorNO]

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/09/2015 8:00 AM

02/05/2015

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY THIRTY-EIGHT

Prior to reconvening Defense Exhibit 915-917 are marked for identification....

Dr. Janeen DeMarte, having previously been sworn, testifies further...

Defense Exhibit 918 is marked for identification.
Defense Exhibit 919 is marked for identification....

Defense Exhibit 920 is marked for identification...

Defense Exhibits 921 and 922 are marked for identification...

4:38 p.m. Court stands at recess until 2/9/15 at 9:30 a.m. in this division...

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/022015/m6688076.pdf