The only gun and knife that is relevant to the case is the gun and knife that killed Travis. Any other guns or knives that Jodi had have nothing to do with the case. She could have had an aresenal of guns and a kitchen full of knives but if none of them were the murder weapons (and none of them were) they've immaterial.
Why in the world should the prosecution be allowed to even mention a gun she had in her car that was not the one that killed Travis or knives in her car that were not the ones that killed Travis? Just because she had them and they were in her car doesn't have anything at all to do with the case. They're irrelevant.
Besides, it was already known that she disposed of the murder weapons somewhere on her way from Travis's house to Utah. She testified to having disposed of the gun that way, and it's logical that she also would have disposed of the knife that way not wanting either one of the murder weapons with her in case she got caught. The prosecution already had no reason to attempt to bring in the knives in her car as one of them being the possible murder weapon (the Barretta was the wrong caliber so couldn't have been), so why would they even WANT to mention the Berretta and the knives in her car when they agreed that she disposed of both weapons she used to kill Travis somewhere on her way from AZ to UT? The Berretta and knives in her car have nothing to do with the case since they weren't the murder weapons, and the prosecution AGREED that they weren't.
