State rests rebuttal case- thread #166

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the link to the evidentiary hearing. I'm predicting (again) that the pedo letters will be a big issue on appeal. Jodi represented herself, Juan (apparently) threatened Matt with perjury if he testified about them and at the hearing Nurmi said in open court over no objection that an expert said that at least one of them -- the one that caused Sky to ask about his age preference, apparently -- was found by an expert to "probably" have been written by Travis.

Mark my words ;)
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
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:

It wouldn't surprise me if Jodi did that (use PPL sales for her personal use). Did she ever actually have a customer, though? I can't remember. But if she had, again, I think this is something that would have upset Travis et al. but not necessarily her parents. I think they would have been angry, sure, but not as angry as Travis seems to imply.

Now getting into Travis' bank accounts, that's way more serious. Wouldn't that be a federal charge? Something like that seems more in line with what TA is talking about. But if she had done that, I think JM would have brought it up. So I'm not sure. Maybe he couldn't prove that she didn't have Travis' permission to access his accounts.

In the end, I'm afraid we'll never find out. I keep holding out hope that some information will be revealed after the trial.
 
Interesting question isn't it? And why did Juan Martinez not want them to testify?


My personal feeling on that is that JM did not want to expose the Hugheses and the PPL connection as it would only make them appear dodgy. JM does not suffer fools gladly.
 
I've been bad. :blushing: I went and got banned from the JA Support fb page.

They can't handle the truth! :rocker:
 
DD needs to go take some Etiquette classes on "How to not interrupt the guests on your show every 10 seconds."
 
Does anyone know anything of what went on between Jodi and Travis AFTER the sex tape, and BEFORE May 26 .. we know she busted into his FB / email accounts .. anything else?

She told Flores Travis backed out of coming to California to see her sing the National Anthem at a racetrack on May 24th..
 
Always thought ALV testimoney was just so far off base and after hearing the Hughes speak, she trully should not be allowed to ever testify or speak again as an expert in any case. She had every opportunity to pick up the phone and speak to them and all of TA girlfriends to find out the truth. That what a trial is...finding the truth. I am praying for this jury to do the right thing and find JA quilty of FDM. And shame on the defense team, I don't know how they can sleep at night knowing the truth. But that may be kind of hard since the devil is sitting next to them.
 
Honestly, guys, we haven't had court since last Thursday.

Two nights in a row, one of the Hugheses has been on HLN in an "exclusive".

I think it 's entirely on topic to discuss them while we have no trial to rehash.

MOO, but no need for a separate thread for the Hugheses.

This would be one dead thread if we couldn't discuss what was on TV while we are on trial break.

everyone that has been involved in this trial, including all of the TA's friends who have been on the various shows, have been discussed on these threads. Some of the posts I have seen (some deleted) are exactly why I was hesitant to post earlier today. :twocents:
 
Where is steely?

Gonna go look


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Really? After Dark is going to have a vote about whether Jodi loves being on trial?

Expert TH's saying she gets migraines, has to get up early,...yeah, well, I don't care.

She'll be moving over to Death Row next and can be head ache free.

Turning off tv now.

talk about running out of ideas. hopefully this show will be ditched after the trial is over.
 
O' it's on topic no doubt. It's become tiresome though, and in some cases a bit contentious.

When I become weary of a topic, I take a break rather than complain about the topic. :toast:

Cheers and peace!
 
Does anyone have the name of the person in the text message Travis sent to her? Where he said her comment to the guy would make people spit in her face or some thing along those lines?
 
It wouldn't surprise me if Jodi did that (use PPL sales for her personal use). Did she ever actually have a customer, though? I can't remember. But if she had, again, I think this is something that would have upset Travis et al. but not necessarily her parents. I think they would have been angry, sure, but not as angry as Travis seems to imply.

Now getting into Travis' bank accounts, that's way more serious. Wouldn't that be a federal charge? Something like that seems more in line with what TA is talking about. But if she had done that, I think JM would have brought it up. So I'm not sure. Maybe he couldn't prove that she didn't have Travis' permission to access his accounts.

In the end, I'm afraid we'll never find out. I keep holding out hope that some information will be revealed after the trial.

Is that the email where he says people would spit in her face?

That's something serious ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
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.

Yes, I agree however were JA's family and supporters asked to remove them as TA family and supporters were? I'll stay with my opinion of not fair as that put his family and friends through just more heartache.
 
Interesting question isn't it? And why did Juan Martinez not want them to testify?

I'm guessing he had a strong enough case without them. Too much baggage to explain to jury about Nurmi/letters/emails etc...plus I bet he cannot mention "the letters" to the jury at all.

I wouldn't be surprised if they testify in a penalty phase
 
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.

Ditto. And thanks.
 
I have to turn this HLN show off......... poor Jodi has to save part of her breakfast so she can have food for lunch, and poor Jodi has to wear a stun belt to court. Come on now, whose fault is it POOR JODI is on trial????

Why did they put a stun belt on her? She must of done something. Any idea what that was?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
2,107
Total visitors
2,235

Forum statistics

Threads
601,311
Messages
18,122,514
Members
231,001
Latest member
SBMonsterFighter
Back
Top