State rests rebuttal case - thread #168

[Weebles]

 

[pipkins]

Is it the jury Jodi keeps sneaking looks to? Shes looking to the right?

 

[Really?]

Is this " Nutty Professor" schtick almost over?

 

[websurfer]

I'm not buying his "aw shucks" routine. Sorry.

Columbo spilled amany a coffee in his series..and put ashes in good cups and all:seeya:

 

[bznbear]

What I would like to know is if he has accidentally spilled water while testifying for the losing side in other trials. It may be his own coping mechanism in order to slow things down so he can think. He DID look rattled, though.

That said, I often knock things over or drop them.

Even after years of ballet, which my mom thought would make me graceful, I'm still just a bull(cow) in a china shop....:blushing:

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I do give him credit on one front...haven't heard anything like "Uhh have ya seen When Harry met Sally?" yet.

 

[Bernina]

Have to say this, gang, I think the Doc will be crawling away from the "Dark Side" before this is over.......:rockon: :rockon: :rockon:

 

[dani]

JA is nodding off...betcha she slinks to the floor before this day is over.

I'm waiting to see what they're gonna do about feeding her in 40 minutes.:fence:

 

[perfectvirgo]

It might appear this is a pointless and protracted skirmish over semantics but JM is keen to discredit the whole PTSD nonsense and reaffirm DrJD's BPD diagnosis. In other words, key to the whole case is that JA has had a personality disorder since a young age and developed into a lying, obsessive, murdering stalker.

This guy is apparently better equipped to interpret the MD's medical report than the MD himself yet he can't control a water jug. The DT is clutching at straws (something that ought to be provided to this witness.) :wink:

 

[JSR]

FYI -- here are some links to court cases in which Geffner testified and was found not credible, along with selected quotes from the opinion about Geffner.

Clark v. Collins, 956 F. 2d 68 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1992

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.

Dr. Geffner testified on cross-examination that he no longer treats patients, but devotes all his time to consulting work related to his specialty. Father's attorney questioned Dr. Geffner about his participation as an expert witness in a number of cases in different jurisdictions. These included Clark v. Collins, 956 F.2d 68 (5th Circuit 1992), a criminal case from Texas in which 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 of the information.
​

O'ROURKE v. O'ROURKE, Tenn: Court of Appeals 2009

Dr. Geffner testified on cross-examination that he no longer treats patients, but devotes all his time to consulting work related to his specialty. Father's attorney questioned Dr. Geffner about his participation as an expert witness in a number of cases in different jurisdictions. These included Clark v. Collins, 956 F.2d 68 (5th Circuit 1992), a criminal case from Texas in which 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 of the information.

The court likewise excluded Dr. Geffner's testimony in Hawaii v. French, 129 P.3d 581 (Hawaii 2006), which involved allegations of child sexual abuse. In State v. Supulvado, 655 So.2d 623 (La. App. 1995), the court limited Dr. Geffner's testimony because he mostly relied upon information supplied by the defendant and because although he is not a medical doctor, he tried to testify about the effects of brain damage on emotional functioning. Dr. Geffner acknowledged that he has testified in a great number of cases, but stated that he did not remember very much about the facts of those particular cases.​

State v. Sepulvado, 655 So. 2d 623 - La: Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1995

The defense also presented Dr. Robert Geffner, a psychologist and president of the Natural Resource Center on Family Violence and Sexual Assault. He evaluated the defendant and reviewed records from Dr. Moore and Ms. Bruce. He testified that defendant suffered from "post traumatic stress disorder" (PTSD) and "dependent personality disorder." He concluded that the defendant probably had a learning disability and some brain damage. He further concluded that she was psychologically paralyzed and suffered perceptual distortions. He admitted that he was not a medical doctor and that "it was not clear to [him] if at the time [of the offense] she really did not know that what she was doing was wrong." Dr. Geffner relied on information provided mostly by the defendant.

In rebuttal, Dr. Seiden, the state's expert, disagreed with Dr. Geffner's statement that a person with a battered woman syndrome cannot make a decision. According to Dr. Seiden, a person with such a disorder may be afraid to make a decision, but that is different from not being able to make decisions. Dr. Seiden also testified that a battered woman usually will stay and let herself be subjected to abuse, but will make a decision to leave when she sees her child is in danger. He said, in the instant case, the defendant was making decisions constantly because a decision not to do something is a decision.​

Wow.

Just wow.

 

[karma-girl]

UGHHH! Why am I such a softie and feel sorry for this guy on the stand!?! Sometimes I feel I am cursed with too much empathy for others (leaving none for myself, lol)!!!

 

[EquallyDivided]

I just want to say the Nurmi's socks are distracting. Tan socks, dark suit - NO!

 

[Arishia]

ITA--Juan is always impeccably prepared & he knows exactly what he is asking. Unlike Willmott who doesn't ever seem to have a grasp on her subject matter.

Juan makes sure that he knows all the information and background and anything else he needs before he walks into the court room. He is not going to allow an "expert" to be lazy & try to get by with easy responses. He also is not going to allow the expert to lie or try to mislead him.

I bet being on his staff is an accomplishment and a badge of honor.

 

[HarvestMoon]

Is this man going to stroke on the stand ?

 

[Garlandy]

I can't believe the DT put this witness on....

 

[Weebles]

 

[PeggyAnnMcKay]

Oh look kids...they're approaching.

 

[SCSam]

I hope people who live in Phoenix NV. who can, will help the sibs and family also friends of TA...housing support etc..

Check out posts from Katiecoolady.. Your prayers were answered.

 

[tss]

Does anyone know why HLN is so far behind? I still have yet to see Juan. I miss In-

"""""""Does anyone know why HLN is so far behind?""""""

Of course I do,,,its to make sure all viewers will stay tuned in through the 9PM Eastern time show Dr Drew will show the end of day

 

[ttcRider]

FINALLY!!! HLN has Juan up now!!