SIDEBAR #8- Arias/Alexander forum

[TorisMom003]

As a parent if one of my daughters brutally killed their ex boyfriend or frankly anyone for that matter and I knew that there was no reason for it such as self defense I damn well would not stand firmly behind my child and try to lesson the penalty for them either. As a parent my job is to teach them right and wrong, to do unto others as they would want to be treated, to show them the proper way to live their life and to NOT commit crimes. Once they are of the age where they are grown and are living in their own homes then they should expect to have be the adults they are and pay for their "mistakes".

So Jodi's parents said to Flores that they were not surprised that Jodi had done this.......and? They were being honest and god bless them for it. I can only imagine the hell they had to go through with dealing with HER as a child, teen and young adult. Jodi is lucky they were in court supporting her at all. Jodi is lucky that they have gone to visit her in jail. Some parents would have washed their hands of her and I wouldn't blame them one bit.

MOO

 

[polleypockets]

https://twitter.com/WildAboutTrial

has a questions and answers can just scroll and read - don't need acct to see

 

[gngr~snap]

I agree that she wasn't normal, but if you listen to dad, he says something about her having issues for the past year and a half to 2 years (and maybe longer than that). That was about the time that she knew Travis. Too close to call, IMO. Anyway, IIRC, the tapes were found to be too prejudicial and weren't going to be allowed in. I don't think ANYTHING would have swayed the foreman...especially after hearing a comment like that.

We have heard about her getting into stare downs with jurors 10 and 17.
I wonder if she did the same to the men???

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

 

[LambChop]

We don't have it ... we only have a few of the communications between them. But I don't think there is any point assuming that if Travis spoke to JA this way then that is acceptable because it's not really. Very likely she did provoke him .. Travis does not have to be a saint to be a victim, because nobody is.

I wonder why there was so little of their communication entered into trial too, perhaps because it would be bad for BOTH sides.

I think I remember the expert saying that only a few text messages were retrievable because they were gone. When you look at the amount of texting they both did back and forth you have to wonder what happened to them and why was it that this one was preserved?

 

[Curious Me]

At this moment I'm so thankful that the jury got it right in the death verdict for the piece of slime that bought, raped and murdered Shaniya Davis. I will forever remember the photo of the murdering rapist holding this tiny little girl at the elevator at the hotel where he raped her. Jury took 39 minutes to come back with a death sentence.

http://fayobserver.com/articles/2013/05/29/1260002?sac=fo.local

Alright, thank you! Got to spread the word when Justice delivers a Death Penalty. RIP Shaniya, sweet baby.

What a punk accepting his sentence. CMja just might get that sentence too.

 

[katydid23]

don't forget when mom said that jodi like to complain she was raised w/ abuse but it wasn't true - it was her imagination - paraphrasing - that really gets rid of the formans mitigating factor - no parent abuse and show she lies about abuse imo

I am not sure you can use MOm's word as proof the abuse never happened.

I don't believe Jodi either. But if she claims Mom was the abuser, then can Mom be the person to use as proof it never happened?

 

[aa9511]

even if you don't like the language, there's a context to what he said. and i'd never label anyone 'abusive' based on one text message. i just wouldn't, and i don't think it makes sense to do that.
seems like JA is benefiting from a one-time blow-up from a guy who i see, if anything, as EXTREMELY patient.
hell, after listening to her blather on the stand, i was calling her much worse than he did after about an hour. i don't know how he kept his cool for as long as he did, frankly.

if i had killed every guy who ever got pissed at me and yelled awful things at me in anger during an argument, i'd have a string of dead bodies behind me.[/QUOTE]

BBM

Exactly kscornfed. I know I've said this before, but Juan needs to get the jury out of Jodi-mode once the defense puts them there. He needs to snap them back to reality with examples of a REASONABLE WOMAN. Such as, he could have asked ALV....so, do you think if some woman reads something like that, she's gonna pick up a knife and stab the guy 29 times??

That's just one example of places where he can put stuff like that in to get the jurors back into reality.

 

[polleypockets]

https://twitter.com/WildAboutTrial

has a questions and answers can just scroll and read - don't need acct to see

 

[elementary]

We don't have it ... we only have a few of the communications between them. But I don't think there is any point assuming that if Travis spoke to JA this way then that is acceptable because it's not really. Very likely she did provoke him .. Travis does not have to be a saint to be a victim, because nobody is.

I wonder why there was so little of their communication entered into trial too, perhaps because it would be bad for BOTH sides.

No, we don't have a pattern of abuse and that is salient, IMO.

Yeah, the way Travis spoke to her at this point is not acceptable but neither does it constitute abuse. Who says he's a saint? There is no pattern of abuse. That's the issue.

Yeah, I don't understand the miniscule evidence we all got. You really can't tell much from that, and in this case, that is the point.

 

[TorisMom003]

We have heard about her getting into stare downs with jurors 10 and 17.
I wonder if she did the same to the men???

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

No, with them she tried to use her sexuality. Heck, it worked for her in the past, why not give it another go.

MOO

 

[aa9511]

I think Juror 17 has a good perspective on CMJA. THe others were trying too hard to humanize her. Even Juror 6, bless her heart. Even she saw CMJA as "sad," but she put those feelings aside as they should have been.

I really think the long trial and time spent with CMJA worked to the defense's benefit.

 

[elementary]

Some probably may not know this is from a "twinterview" that's going on now with WildaboutTrial. Here's another tidbit from Tara: She thinks Jodi wanted to be the last one to ever have sex with Travis. Sounds about right!

That speaks to the Black Widow syndrome. I agree.

 

[AZWatcher]

AZ maybe this will help?

First, on twitter, the most recent response is on top, so you have to start at the bottom to follow a conversation.
Then the first name in a tweet (I put them in blue) is the one commenting. (tweet is FROM this person.)
The second @name (red) is the person receiving the comment/question.
So go to the bottom and move up and see if that helps :seeya:

"Navy"]Tara Kelley @tarakelley320 [/COLOR]

@WildAboutTrial yes the system works! It was a very long, emotional process but I am happy I got to do this!Met alot of great people #17WAT


6m
wildabouttrial @WildAboutTrial
@tarakelley320 So, does the system work? Are you happy that you were a juror? #17WAT

You are so kind to stop and explain this to me... This really helps and I truly appreciate your patience!

 

[Maryann123]

Totally agree, LambChop. No abuse by Travis or the parents was proven whatsoever. And in addition to that, I personally believe that it's illogical to believe that it occured. Not a dig at anybody, just my opinion.

Furthermore, I feel that it was very much proven that Jodi was the abuser.

It's just such a hotspot with so many people, that I see why defense teams use it.

I do wonder if at some point in our future, we will start to see states change their laws about what defense teams can argue at trial. It has gotten SO out of hand what they are allowed to say without any corroboration.

You said it! I don't know how that one day of text messaging is considered abuse. And remember, Alyce thought it was abuse when Travis told her to erase some messages on her phone so he could leave her a message, and he didn't say, please.

Calling her a *advertiser censored*, is a big clue to the anger he was expressing. Remember the guy that took her to the restaurant, when her car broke down? She claims it was no big deal, he made no advances towards her. Why did Travis get so mad about that? Not for the reasons she stated, and that's for sure. That's probably the person she gave a BJ to in the Starbucks parking lot, and not Travis! Somehow, Travis found out she was a *advertiser censored*. I can see her doing whatever it took to get whatever she wanted.

 

[SunnyinMO]

Not me! This was a comment about what a juror disclosed. That the four non DP votes were ALL the oldest impaneled jurors. The comment I replied to was they thought perhaps this is why the defense called older expert witnesses, to appeal to an older jury. Samuels, Alyce and Geffner. I would never say every person over 65 would think one way only but it seems that the four on the jury did for whatever reasons

TexMex, I was away all weekend...could you point me to where I can read/hear what this juror had to say say...BBM above.. TIA

 

[MidwestMama]

You are so kind to stop and explain this to me... This really helps and I truly appreciate your patience!

Glad to help. :blushing:

 

[TXProfessional]

I'm curious - if someone beat me up physically once...would you not define that as abuse? Or do they need to do it repeatedly for it to be abuse?

That is actually assault and battery. BBM

And according to long standing DV theory, batterer-based language, and a host of contextual factors the answer to your 2nd question is YES

 

[polleypockets]

I am not sure you can use MOm's word as proof the abuse never happened.

I don't believe Jodi either. But if she claims Mom was the abuser, then can Mom be the person to use as proof it never happened?

but iirc mom brought it up on her own, not because ja was already saying it, so imo it does show how ja tried using that excuse b4 - dad said the same thing to didn't he?? and dad was talking about how jodi was planning on marrying TA, like he didn't know JA and TA broke up b4 she moved to mesa iirc - it might not be proof porsitive, but it would make jurors really question ja a lot more - imo

 

[elementary]

I think that is where the age thing came into play. My parents would see those comments as ABUSIVE, no matter what the context was. They would consider it a very ugly abusive action to call a woman names like that, repeatedly.

I however, being younger and having kids in their 20's, know that kids these days speak like that to each other. They use 'ho' and b---tch and skunk in everyday conversations. [ ha. autocorrect did not want me to say '*advertiser censored*.'

I do find it surprising that they thought her childhood was abusive though. A wooden spoon? My grandma had a HUGE wooden spoon in the kitchen that her kids gave her as a joke, but in response to her habit of punishing them with a quick whack to their backsides. They were not abused, they were being 'corrected' as she called it. And it is that same Irish Grandma who called me 'Katydid.' :heartbeat:

No no no no no. I am older than your parents. You are talking ageism. I am appalled by the younger generations' disrespectful, unaesthetic view and major attitude when it comes to humans in their communications, but that has nothing to do with how people are socialised and their lack of critical thinking. This happens in every generation.

It's about REASON. This has nothing to do with age.

 

[Sleuth5]

PHOENIX (AP) — The Arizona Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal on whether a judge improperly allowed prosecutors to seek a death sentence for Jodi Arias in the 2008 stabbing and shooting of her former boyfriend.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/arizona-supreme-court-denies-review-arias-case

Thanks, Mrs. G!