State rests rebuttal case- thread #166

[Karmady]

Sorry, I hate when people do this, but do you have a link for that? I totally missed MM saying that!

Same. But even if he did say that, he's not testifying to the jury and the letters didn't come in so his credibility is no more or less relevant than Chris Hughes' imo

 

[bettybaby00]

Sorry still have to strongly disagree!

I'm erring on the side of caution when it comes to my kid. An accused pedophile isn't getting anywhere near mine. Period.

I realize Travis was dead at the time...

But I would bet my last dollar Sky thought back to all the times Travis stayed overnight, was he ever alone with the kids, omg omg omg!!!

That's how my mind would race.

And I would be beyond furious upon learning Nurmi lied about such a thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get you. First and foremost, as close as Travis seemed to be with CH &SH how long we're they "close friends?"

I had an experience once...not the same but this talk made me think of it...

When my daughter was 7 or so, she was invited to a friends for her 1st sleep over. I knew the child, very sweet, and had met the parents on several occasions. I was with a group of women one night--book club--and as we chatted, I mentioned the fact my daughter was invited over to this girl's house. One woman remarked, "oh you can't let her go over there!" I said, WHAT, what do you mean? She became hesitant, but finally said, "the mother drinks."

I was concerned and was talking it over with a good friend of mine the next day, and she said, "that's unfair, you have no basis other than this other person's word that this is true." I replied, "you're right, I don't know if its true, but this is my kid. How can I feel comfortable about this when I've been warned this mom has a drinking problem. What if during the sleepover, the mom has a few and says to the girls, "lets go get ice cream!!" And then loads them into the car. You can't turn back the clock if something bad happens, you get no 20/20 hindsight do overs.

I called the mom, and said, "we'd love to have Jennifer at our house instead, bc my daughter isn't ready to sleepover someone else's house yet. End of story.

I know it's not the same bc I didn't know the woman that well, but its a similar mindset IMO. Many times when someone is found to be a sex offender, their "circle of friends" had no clue.

Anyway just my two cents, and not intended to offend anyone

 

[Schuby]

While I find Janine Driver is interesting and insightful much of the time, I thought her examples (e.g., Nurmi slouching in his seat) of why she thinks the Judge favors Jodi were pretty lame/insignificant. Moreover, she really tap danced around the question "A LA Jodi" before Dr. Drew was finally able to pin her down and get her to respond. Sometimes Janine just likes to hear herself TALK--about herself.

I think Judge Stephens has ruled fairly, doesn't call attention to herself (not a media hog), and with a eye toward preserving the verdict in the likely event of an appeal. In the end, that will be the true test of the judge's competency/effectiveness in this trial. Appeal denied.

I agree. Nurmi slouches because he's a larger gentleman and uncomfortable in the chairs...I was surprised she couldn't see that.

 

[ElleElle]

But don't you think Travis is smart enough to know that it would only be Jodi's word to everyone he was a pedophile? The Hughes knew she was a liar.

Besides, Travis did not have shred of *advertiser censored* on his computer. Not even regular guy *advertiser censored*.

So IF Jodi was going to go ahead and accuse Travis of being a pedophile (which led to the text argument between them) she told Travis FIRST? As in a 'I heard something about you from <insert mysterious man Travis references here> .. if that is true I feel like I am duty bound to tell <insert Chris Hughes, the Bishop, EVERYONE here>.

It's definitely a possibility since pedophilia was high on her list of things to accuse Travis of and would severely disrupt his life in every conceivable area .. the church, his relationship with the Hughes' (and therefore work) his love-life etc ..

A sort of past behaviour is a good predictor for future behaviour hypothetical.

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

We don't know how long she bought it.

If it were me... I'd probably ...freak out...start hyperventilating.,, Run to the phone and start screaming at Juan demanding to know why he didn't tell me!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IIRC, Chris Hughes testified during the evidentiary hearing that he did contact Juan after speaking with Nurmi.

I think. lol

There was a lot of acrimony between Chris and Nurmi during that testimony and maybe I'm confusing Chris with Abe about the call to Juan's office.

I think I've confused myself now ... :nevermind: ... lol

 

[Linda7NJ]

To be fair, Matt also is not testifying before the jury and also testified in court outside the jury's presence like Hughes did. There has been much discussion of Matt's credibility. I can't really see much difference between the two other than which side they're perceived to be on. jmo

Except he was willing to lie for Jodi.... Until Juan made it very clear he was gonna pay a price. A price Jodi clearly wasn't worth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

Is there any video of Matt? Was he in court? I'm sorry but I don't remember that. I know he gave a deposition but other than that I don't remember. If there is a like please provide it. TIA

No video or link that I know of. I responded to a similar question above. I think the source is Shana Hogan and maybe some references Juan made at trial (per Midwestmama) and/or some minute entries.

 

[FrayedKnot]

IIRC, she was on Jodi's side when they were first dating. It wasn't until later that she realized Jodi was an incredible liar, among other things.

Right. But this email was AFTER Travis was murdered and waaaayyy after she knew Jodi was a psychopathic "bunny boiler". So there should have been ZERO doubt in her mind that Nurmi was lying on Jodi's behalf.

I don't for one minute think she believed TA was a pedo. I think she was more afraid that the accusation would come out and make her and her husband look bad by association. I also think the possible hit on their PPL business was in the forefront.

Again, MOO.

 

[GoAskAllie]

I can remember how so many loved Judge Belvin Perry. How nice he was to the jury, remember the desert lady and making sure that whole horrid group were well taken care of? I never liked him. As it ends up.......

I have felt that JSS has been way too lenient with the defense. Giving into all their whims, I know she does't want to leave anything for appeal, yeah yeah. But, there is such a thing as giving in too much. A very subtle example is, how is it OK for JA family and friends to wear ribbons for DV and it's no OK for TA family and friends to wear ribbons for him? To me that speaks volumes and very unfair. An extreme example is allowing a new surrebuttle witness.

She has allowed JA to take pills in court, she has allowed for so very much. Almost bending backwards (sorry JA, I know, only you can do that) to appease every DT whim.

I suspect another sleepless night for me.

While it's outrageous that Jodi's family and friends wears ribbons to support DV (given we know the claim is a total sham), she has yet to be convicted in a court of law. Fortunately, Travis's family and his supporters wear ribbons in the courtroom too. Fair to both sides, even if we don't like it.

 

[Karmady]

Except he was willing to lie for Jodi.... Until Juan made it very clear he was gonna pay a price. A price Jodi clearly wasn't worth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just asked above about the "willing to lie" thing. Do you know how we know that? I've heard it but I don't know what the source of it is. Midwestmama said Juan mentioned it?

 

[Love Never Fails]

bringing this over from the previous thread.



MichaelJames
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Apple Vallley, Minnesota
Posts: 23
I remained silent as I read pages upon pages of disparraging remarks against Chris and Sky Hughes, but I can no longer keep to myself.

I have developed a relationship with Chris and he is one of the most caring, concerned, helpful and compassionate people I have ever had the fortune of getting to know.

To claim that the Hughes are somehow hungry for their own fame and glory in regards to this trial is blatantly false. Chris swore he would NOT speak to anyone until the trial was over. While I was surprised when he told me he was doing the Dr. Drew show, I was glad he was. Both Chris and Sky are in AZ now...they rented a house for a month so they could support Travis' family during these last few days of testimony and also to wait with them for a verdict. While Chris was NOT under subpoena, Sky was until just a couple of days ago. It took Wilmott two days to answer Sky's inquiry as to whether or not she could be released from her subpoena.

Chris was the executor of Travis' estate. Everyone knew how important the friendship was between the Hughes and Travis. They only did 48 Hours to talk about their friend.

Chris WAS scared for Travis...he DID try reaching him. He DID reach out to friends in the Phoenix area to do a safety check on Travis. For those on this forum who pretend to know HOW they'd react if they were in the same situation, YOU HAVE NO IDEA what you would actually do!

Chris, Sky and all other players in this nightmare are forever changed. When a few days passed between our communications, imagine my surprise when the local police showed up at my home to perform a welfare check on me! Yes, Chris had contacted them. Since Travis' death, they no longer can "wait" to find out why a person (like myself) may have gone off the grid.

The Hughes are wonderful people. There's nothing insincere or phony about either of them. People ridiculed Sky for "grinning" while she was both on 48 Hours and also on the witness stand. She was nervous! There are people whose mouths are always in an apparent frown....Sky's mouth always has a hint of a smile. It's her facial features, and NOT something sinister or manipulative!

While I understand we are all entitled to our opinions, I cannot stand judgement against people who others have never met, encountered, etc.

As for the Travis Alexander Legacy Fund, this is something very near and dear to NOT ONLY Chris, but also to Travis' family and friends. Having witnessed their most loved Travis being cast as a pedophilic sexual deviant domestic violence perpetrator has served as a motivation to bring Travis' reputation back to that of the honorable, decent, kind, generous, motivated man Travis actually was. Chris has asked me to be on the board...and I can assure all of you that Chris has no intention of taking ANY salary or monies from this fund for personal gain. It's offensive to claim otherwise.

Please be mindful as you trash Chris (and indubidably Sky after tonight's episode of Dr. Drew) that the Hughes have friends on this forum and your statements are highly offensive and hurtful to those of us who know, love and respect them.

Thank you.
__________________
Michael James

Mr. James,
I am Team Travis too. What we do here is express ideas and opinions. We are not trashing Mr. And Mrs. Hughes. I never even saw Chris Hughes on Dr. Drew last night. I just read some comments. I do not doubt their friendship to Travis. Hindsight is always 20/20. I don't know what all led up to the night that they were up in the wee hours talking about Jodi while she was supposed to be sleeping. We are talking about Jodi here, so let's all admit she is all kinds of crazy.

However, I would have felt somewhat strange to be told to go to bed and hear the other three adults in the home talking about me. On the flip side of that, I did hear that Chris said Jodi gave them a very evil, hateful look. At that point, and again we are looking back, I would have told Travis to please get this woman out of my home and away from my children immediately.

Also, when Chris Hughes appeared in court in front of the attorneys and judge (no jury), he stated Nurmi was a liar and a snake, I believe, for calling his wife and telling her that he had letters that Travis wrote to Jodi that proved he was a pedophile. I would call Nurmi a liar and a snake also because the letters were proven to be forged!

But what did Sky do with that information? Did she immediately call the prosecution to find out the real story? Did she just keep quiet until the truth was told? No. She emailed another friend and supposedly told that friend exactly what Nurmi told her and said if she had known that, she would have kept Travis away from her children and something about him being strange. That doesn't sound like a friend to me. JMO.

Now that said, we have not seen the details of the emails. I would like to, so that I know where they do stand. But I have to believe that if she didn't send such an email and if they did not call Travis a player or a womanizer, then Mr. Martinez would have already had them testify. Many of his friends did not testify. We may never know why.

No one is trashing your friends. They may be exactly as you say they are. But there are questions.

 

[ElleElle]

Ok, I have 100% respect for Sky. She was the most informational so far in this case.

She tried with Travis, but Travis did not believe it. He had no idea Jodi was evil.

 

[sammijo]

Casey.... IMO that was the jurors fault. The prosecution proved their case. They lost sight of the ball.

They had zero common sense, logic ....and reasoning flew out the window. It wasn't the first time, nor will it be the last.

IMO the number of stupid is growing daily in society.

Public school imo is actually counterproductive for children to learn how to think! As a result...Expect more screwed up verdicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree to some extent. Certainly the jurors were careless and did not review any evidence during deliberations, or so I read. And their verdict makes one wonder if they were listening at all during testimony. :/

However, the waters were so muddied from the opening statement of the defense. They came out with the scandalous accusations, that apparently held in juror minds throughout, and they didn't follow it up with any proof. It was said just for shock value, and it worked.

I don't see how that should be legal. It's like a slight of hand magic trick. That's what I just do not get. When did the court of law become a magic show?

I agree that our education system needs serious work. That being said, parents have a huge responsibility in their child's education, and there is not enough parental involvement and reinforcement of what kids are learning in school.

My son is receiving a public education and he is at the top of his class. Straight A Honors every six weeks. He's young and he's had great teachers, but as parents, my husband and I stress the importance of education inside and outside the classroom.

I hope we are raising our son with enough intelligence AND common sense, that should he ever be a juror, he will be able to handle the job.

 

[MidwestMama]

Sorry, I hate when people do this, but do you have a link for that? I totally missed MM saying that!

I don't have a link. I only know JM referenced it. Apparently he posted on JAII several months ago saying he would lie for Jodi. I can't link because of FB but if you google his name with "I would lie for Jodi" you can find it.

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

IMO we need to lay off the Hughes. They are living with the What Ifs. They are NOT on trial. Poster Michael James asked us to lay off. If he is a friend of the Hughes, then he is probably a friend of the Alexander Family. Can we move on and perhaps just send Tricia questions we would like answered by Chris?

With the utmost of respect I sincerely do not want that route to be taken. Unfortunate as it may be, this forum and tens of thousands across the country contain posts that vary in their tone about people directly involved in events and crimes, and also about people even loosely connected to the events.
As much as I can empathize with anyone feeling uncomfortable reading anything even remotely negative or probing about someone they know personally or are even related to, changing the way the forum works for selected people is not the way to go.
I am not hard-hearted but I now have to agree with the hundreds of suggestions I have seen over the years given to people involved in events, when they feel offended by what they read in a public forum. People suggest that those offended refrain from reading about their friends and loved ones in public forums.
I have a great deal of compassion for anyone who has suffered a loss but singling out a person or persons and then making them 'off limits' to questions and analysis is not appropriate. That is not what has occurred here historically, to the best of my knowledge. If I am incorrect, please let me know.
This forum has rules. And darned good ones. And they are enforced fairly and regularly. There are sites out there that make me cringe, and that's not easy to do.
I understand the desire to defend the Hughes, but suggesting that we change the way we deal with our posts here is not something I would be in favor of. I am only one and this is just my opinion. But I like it here and would like to stay. If changes such as that occur, I would not feel as respectfully open as I do now. JMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Sorry, I hate when people do this, but do you have a link for that? I totally missed MM saying that!

I do know he was the one that handed those forged letters over to the lawyers.

The chick that's writing the book said it and I do recall reading that Juan said if he took the stand and lied he would file charges on him faster than his feet could hit the ground...

He also allegedly posted that he would lie for her. I can't vouch if it was really him. But I did read it, and his name was attached.

Those coded messages also go a long way to him willing to back up her tale.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Angelina Frost]

I just asked above about the "willing to lie" thing. Do you know how we know that? I've heard it but I don't know what the source of it is. Midwestmama said Juan mentioned it?

MM supposedly posted on the JAII site, deliberately ignoring the warning not to talk about the case. I am fairly sure Juan was alluding to the fact that doing so, and negating his chances to testify for the defense, was tantamount to "betrayal."

Of course, there is no way to 100% authenticate the post as coming from MM. I read it and it was (imo) suspect.

 

[nwmouse]

I am so grateful to all the posters here, who have so much invested in the outcome of this terrible murder. The ONLY thing I am focusing on right now is JUSTICE FOR TRAVIS. No matter what happens, that is the most important thing. Let's all keep that vision in sight. JUSTICE FOR TRAVIS ALEXANDER, A VICTIM WHO WAS SLAUGHTERED IN COLD BLOOD.

 

[missy1974]

Right. But this email was AFTER Travis was murdered and waaaayyy after she knew Jodi was a psychopathic "bunny boiler". So there should have been ZERO doubt in her mind that Nurmi was lying on Jodi's behalf.

I don't for one minute think she believed TA was a pedo. I think she was more afraid that the accusation would come out and make her and her husband look bad by association. I also think the possible hit on their PPL business was in the forefront.

Again, MOO.

I'm watching her now on Dr. Drew. And when she said she knew right away Jodi wrote the fake stalker letter and tried to tell Travis that, yet she believed Nurmi?????

 

[katiedid2]

----------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of us here wonder what horrible secret TA threatened to expose in their (late May?) emails/texts.

IMO, something $$$$ related. Something that would shock many people, per TA (including, IIRC, his friends, church, PPL, and her parents).

I read here on w/s the State listed as a witness a financial fraud investigator.

What $$$-related offense could JA have bn involved in?

In cross exam, JM asked her about the last year shefiled US Income Tax returns.
She hacked into TA's email, & soc media a/c's (facebook, myspace).
His bank a/c's? His charge a/c's? His paypal a/c?

But I think it was more than that.
Is it possible, as a PPL rep/agent, she sold PPL policy/coverage to someone and collected the premium (check(s)?) directly from the buyer?
Maybe failed to forward the payment(s) to PPL?
Maybeconverted the funds by depositing the check(s) to her own a/c for personal use?
IMO, poss that TA may have learned of JA's act --whatever it was)just before his threat, but her act may have occurred months before then.


Exposing her for converting PPL funds (if she did) is my hypotheses.
:twocents:

Thank you for sharing! Sure sounds plausible. It had to have been something pretty bad for him to be upset to such degree.
She is one evil conniving woman.