State rests rebuttal case- thread #165

[dani]

Just watching the youtube video of first day of JM's cross of JA... because I'm hooked...
Within the first 2 minutes he asks her "Did I ASK you whether or not you called her "stupid" ma'am?" (talking about her "dumb sister", JA smirks back "I called her dumb AND stupid") :floorlaugh:
I just love Juan.
Okay, carry on. :blushing:

Well, her sister isn't on trial for her life for murdering her ex-BF. So who's the STUPID one now, Jodi?

To quote Forest Gump…"Stupid is as Stupid does". :drumroll:

 

[ShadyLady]

Some questions here:

So did anything come out of Aylce (eg. Impeachment). Any updates on her?
http://tamaratattles.com/2013/04/12/will-alyce-laviolette-be-impeached-as-an-expert-witness/

Why, does any one know why DB did not want his face to be shown? Reasons stated anywhere? Any talk about that?

Thanks

...maybe showing his penis in public was enough???

 

[suspicious1]

...maybe showing his penis in public was enough???

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

He was scared...:scared:

 

[Caylee Advocate]

This may have already been posted, if so, I apologize. It seems that Juan will have no problem dismantling this sur rebuttal witness. Buh Bye to another hired gun ....... Another One Bites The Dust.




In this case, Dr. Geffner was impeached.


NENNO v. STATE
The question about appellant's statement was not designed to show the truth of the statement contained in the document but to impeach Dr. Geffner by attacking the basis for his opinion. The State wanted to undermine Dr. Geffner's opinion by showing that he relied upon specific statements made by appellant to formulate that opinion despite other information (upon which he also claims to have relied) that showed appellant telling a different story.

He testified for the defendant (Nenno) in this trial, and said he was in some kind of fog and couldn't remember certain things.






More on Dr. Geffner:

In a Texas case; Clark v. Collins, 956 F.2d 68 (5th Circuit 1992) the court found that Dr. Geffner’s affidavit lacked credibility, in part because it was based on hearsay information supplied by the defendant’s attorney with no independent verification.

The court also excluded the Dr.’s testimony in Hawaii v. French, 129 P.3d 581 (Hawaii 2006) involving allegations of child sexual abuse.

In State v. Supulvado, 655 So.2d 623 (La. App. 1995) the court limited most of his testimony as he relied mostly on the information supplied by the defendant and he testified about effects of brain damage on emotional functioning though he is not a medical doctor.


Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). “[C]ounsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment. Id. at 690, 104 S.Ct. at 2066.

22 The state trial court found that Dr. Geffner’s affidavit lacked credibility for three reasons: (1) the evaluation, which makes conclusions as to Clark’s conduct in 1987, was conducted five years later, in 1992; (2) Dr. Geffner did not review the court records or a transcript of the trial testimony; and (3) Dr. Geffner relied upon records from Clark’s childhood in Pennsylvania, with no records since 1976, and upon hearsay information supplied by Clark’s attorneys, with no independent verification of the information, and interviews with Clark. The state court further found that, even if credible, Dr. Geffner’s affidavit does not support a conclusion that Clark was either incompetent or insane at the time of the murders, or that he did not act deliberately within the meaning of the first special issue.

 

[Lilly12]

When I heard Beth say that, I said a few 4 letter words. WTH? Dr. Geffner is not an MD, I hope JSS denies that with a quickness.

They did not have their own medical examiner on and I am thinking, not because they did not try but because they could not get anyone to disagree with Dr. Horn. So now they want to come thru the back door, not only with someone who is AV soulmate, (for lack of a better word), in theory but have him testify when he is not a medical doctor. This should not bed allowed!!!
What going on. I sure hope the judge sees through this scam, and disallows it. My opinion only.

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

HLN is so out of the loop. I am fuming. HH has no clue what everyone is referring to with JA's 'art work that is stolen'....

 

[MickyTwoShade]

if he's allowed to testify to how TA may have acted with a bullet hole in his brain, all Juan has to do is point out that he's not an MD.

 

[Hope4More]

I so wish JM had been able to bring the pedophile letters in as evidence of Jodi manufacturing a story to dupe the jury into believing Travis was a pedophile.

Yes. Indeed. Fair trials also yes, indeed, but really. Why in the world, for example, is it too prejudicial for the State to bring in "allegations" of JA slashing TA's tires--repeatedly, but it is not too prejudicial for the defense to bring up at least equally unproven charges like the pedophilia?

The pedophilia charges spoke directly to a pattern of JA lying and slandering TA, and had NO factual basis, just JA's lies. On the other hand, the tire-slashing fit into the very demonstrable pattern of JA stalking TA and intentionally interjecting herself/disrupting his relationships with other woman.


Just wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[MeeBee]

HLN is so out of the loop. I am fuming. HH has no clue what everyone is referring to with JA's 'art work that is stolen'....

Huh? They are implying that Dior and Guess "copied" JA? What are they talking about?

 

[Zuri]

Beth Karas said that the motion the DT filed this morning was to allow the psychologist to also include testimony rebutting Dr Horn. They claim the psychologist should be able to testify to this since he is a neuropsychologist. The judge better not let a Phd rebut an MD.

How does a neurobiologist even think they could rebut the testimony of a medical examiner? Is this to support JA testimony that she shot TA first and that he could speak, reason, process, walk, crawl after she shot him?

 

[Schuby]

I hope it will be successful and that they name it "The Travis Alexander Bill" to memorialize this beautiful human being. :seeya:

I hate to shoot down people's hopes but I don't see how a bill like that could be written in a way that isn't so vague as to be meaningless. For example, Jodi claims that text messages, the phone sex tape and the "Travis Alexander's" shirt ARE corroborating evidence. Isn't it really for the jury to decide what they consider to be credible and what isn't anyway?

 

[Gypseagirl]

Is Dr Geffner really able to be used to rebut Dr Horn's testimony AS WELL AS Dr DeMarte's .. how messed up is this, it's like a one witness fits all situation .. If Judge SS let's this happen we know we will not finish on Wednesday. Never seen this before, it's really like giving the DT one final bite of the apple.

One final bite of a bad apple. :seeya:

 

[Wolfpack Fan]

Is Matt the person who called the hotline about Jodi? I was watching some of Jodi's cross where she told Juan that she couldn't afford to leave Mesa earlier. He mentioned her mother coming out to help her move before she got mad and sent her mother home. He said that when she asked her parents for help, her mother flew right there to help. She said something about Matt calling her mother once and ended with something like "If I needed the kind of help Matt said." Those aren't the exact words, but whatever she said made me think Matt called her mother to tell her that Jodi needed help for her mental problems.

 

[JustMeDeb]

I have no issues with DT bringing up their new witness. At this point, it is just a huge waste of time. All the jury is going to hear is BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!

 

[EquallyDivided]

Huh? They are implying that Dior and Guess "copied" JA? What are they talking about?

HLN just covered her 'artwork' but didn't understand the viewer question. Viewer stated Jodi stole the artwork but HLN apparently doesn't know the latest revelation that she's tracing.

They did say that she could be on the hook for her defense if she's making money.

They also stated that a wrongful death civil suit would funnel proceed to the Alexander family from any artwork sold.

They never touched on the copyright issue. Breaking news, indeed. Bombshell is yesterday's news and they still don't get it.

 

[Gypseagirl]

I have no issues with DT bringing up their new witness. At this point, it is just a huge waste of time. All the jury is going to hear is BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!

Exactly!! that is how I feel. :seeya:

 

[Southern_Meadow]

Dr Horn didn't say anything new did he? Perhaps he explained things a bit clearer??

Nope, which is why I don't understand their even asking for this. surrebuttal is to rebutt new evidence brought out in a rebuttal case. There was nothing new. It's bulls***.

 

[JustMeDeb]

HLN will be announcing the JA verdict. Problem is, it won't be until 2023.

Man oh man do I miss Court TV and InSession. HLN's coverage has been such an epic fail.

 

[The Village Idiot]

Also.........I hope out of this case some things change in the way laws/courts handle things. That TA case can get some New updates in the criminal system, in his Memory.

• Like people in jail getting out stuff on Social Media. Being the way Social Media is now.....NEW JUSTICE SYSTEMS/LAWS MUST BE MADE to stop this
  
  
• JA selling artwork in Ebay.....She is in Jail!! How can she not afford a lawyer (has Public ones) YET CLEARLY HAS AN INCOME with the sales of these pictures!!
  
  
• Made to WORK OFF legal cost while in Jail, even if she gets the DP. Getting some $$ back from her a$$ is better than nothing at all.

Legal Laws must be made about Social Media world that people in jail can not use. She (JA) has made MOCKERY OF THE JUSTICE LAWS. Twitter, Ebay, etc.

 

[TexMex]

Ha!, right JustMeDeb.
The verdict will be read at something like 1pm and HLN will "hit the pause button" so many times viewers will see it at 2:45. Hopefully Jodi will be in a van headed to Perryville by then