State rests rebuttal case - thread #170

[polleypockets]

Agreed. I really wish the judge hadn't allowed the DT's witness to question the ME's report. I don't think he was qualified to do so, and believe it was unfair to the State to give him the opportunity to testify this late in the trial.

i can see the judge letting in a sur rebuttal witness, what i don't get was why he was allowed to testify about the medical brain part, when that is not what he was a true expert on - imo. shouldn't the judge had said they would need an expert - like a medical dr or coroner - to rebutt dr horne?

 

[Steely Dan]

Juan's neuropsych. She rebutted Dr. Geffner and backed up Dr. DeMarte. Pointed out Jodi lied, several times- lying and tigers and bears, Oh My!

BBM

:floorlaugh:

Maybe one should because I understood it to be very crucial to the defense, so much so that isn't Flores in trouble about what he testified to in the Death Penalty hearing?

The defense, in my opinion, is trying to convince the jury that she shot him but the reason she stabbed him is that he still presented a threat. I can't even understand that reasoning, but that's not the point.

If it didn't matter, then why wouldn't they relent that she stabbed him first, he kept coming, so she shot him?

I don't know. I don't see any scenario that works for the defense, but apparently, they are insistent upon this for some reason. What is the reason if it doesn't affect deliberation of guilt?

This is what the defense theory is from what I've seen so far.

Jodi went to TA's at his invitation the night before she met the guy in Utah. She saw him in the study and they went to bed (sleeping only) In the morning Jodi said she had some discs of pictures from their prior trips. Unfortunately, the discs were scratched and Travis freaked out by grabbing Jodi and bending her over the desk and doing something sexually nasty to her.

After Travis calmed down they went upstairs and had consensual sex and took pictures with Travis' new camera. While Jodi was taking pictures of Travis in the shower she dropped the camera about 2 inches and Travis became enraged screaming; "A FIVE YEAR OLD COULD HOLD A CAMERA BETTER THAN YOU!!" He then leaped from the shower and picked her up and threw her down knocking the wind out of her. (Well not in the medical sense.) Jodi got up and ran into the closet and found Travis' gun. The gun was possibly in a holster, possibly not. She turned on him in the bathroom after coming out of the other side of the closet. She aimed the gun at him hoping he'd stop. He tackled her like a linebacker and she shot him in the head. (That proves self defense.)

She then went into a "fog" and can't remember stabbing and cutting Travis up. This happened because she had been an abused woman by Travis for so long she finally snapped. When the fog lifted she was heading toward the Hoover Dam.

At least that's how I understand it.

 

[amberjul]

After all the trajectory talk today in trial, I'm left with that vision of the defendant's take on a "linebacker tackle" - no matter what was argued we do know she did not shoot him in defense. jmo

 

[Mrs G Norris]

BBM

:floorlaugh:



This is what the defense theory is from what I've seen so far.

Jodi went to TA's at his invitation the night before she met the guy in Utah. She saw him in the study and they went to bed (sleeping only) In the morning Jodi said she had some discs of pictures from their prior trips. Unfortunately, the discs were scratched and Travis freaked out by grabbing Jodi and bending her over the desk and doing something sexually nasty to her.

After Travis calmed down they went upstairs and had consensual sex and took pictures with Travis' new camera. While Jodi was taking pictures of Travis in the shower she dropped the camera about 2 inches and Travis became enraged screaming; "A FIVE YEAR OLD COULD HOLD A CAMERA BETTER THAN YOU!!" He then leaped from the shower and picked her up and threw her down knocking the wind out of her. (Well not in the medical sense.) Jodi got up and ran into the closet and found Travis' gun. The gun was possibly in a holster, possibly not. She turned on him in the bathroom after coming out of the other side of the closet. She aimed the gun at him hoping he'd stop. He tackled her like a linebacker and she shot him in the head. (That proves self defense.)

She then went into a "fog" and can't remember stabbing and cutting Travis up. This happened because she had been an abused woman by Travis for so long she finally snapped. When the fog lifted she was heading toward the Hoover Dam.

At least that's how I understand it.

Lol Steely I think that's it .. Now to me that's still murder 1 because she could have got away after the head shot the DT were so determined to prove WAS NOT FATAL .. So pretty much in her fog she decides to find a knife and stab him until her arm couldn't stab anymore then nearly cut his head off .. Which is intent to kill for no reason .. Murder 1.

 

[verbonica]

I have to agree with you here. My impression is that Horn is so astonished at the lack of understanding of basic anatomy and physiology by the questioning defense atty that he is dismissive/ arrogant.

He could have done SOOOOO much better explaining the intracranial GSW to the jury. A mere "advanced practice nurse" could have done better explaining and teaching, IMO. Docs are not always good at that sort of thing-- some docs tend toward intellectual arrogance, and hate to be questioned.

Horn is unquestionably handsome, and quite intelligent, which is usually a good thing in a witness, but my dominant sense is he is annoyed that he has to keep explaining very simple concepts to the defense atty and jury. Don't get me wrong-- he is quite intelligent, and experienced. But he is annoyed and defensive. I get the sense he is in a hurry to get off the stand. And I worry a lot that if there is one (or more) boneheads on the jury, that he has not "connected" with them as to what he is SUPPOSED to explain.

I like him, because I understand practitioners like him. But I am not at all convinced that the jury "gets" his demeanor. I worry. I'm not at all sure he connected with the jury.

Yep, pathologists don't have much need for a good bedside manner nor for good communication skills with their 'patients'.

 

[wasnt_me]

Your question is really interesting. I don't know if JSS will instruct that if the jury sees it one way it equals this punishment and another way equals a different punishment, but have been trying to recall if I've seen that before... can't.

Nonetheless the jury instructions will be aired along with the closing arguments; it will be interesting to hear if the order of things (so to say) reflects jury deliberations. Definitely food for thought.

Thanks. I have seen jurors before on this crime shows I watch say things like "we were told not to consider that," etc. So I was wondering about it. I've watched SO many of these types of shows that I can't be specific. But I'd heard of jury instructions being problems for Jury's in coming to their verdicts

 

[Dr. Know?]

BBM

:floorlaugh:



This is what the defense theory is from what I've seen so far.

Jodi went to TA's at his invitation the night before she met the guy in Utah. She saw him in the study and they went to bed (sleeping only) In the morning Jodi said she had some discs of pictures from their prior trips. Unfortunately, the discs were scratched and Travis freaked out by grabbing Jodi and bending her over the desk and doing something sexually nasty to her.

After Travis calmed down they went upstairs and had consensual sex and took pictures with Travis' new camera. While Jodi was taking pictures of Travis in the shower she dropped the camera about 2 inches and Travis became enraged screaming; "A FIVE YEAR OLD COULD HOLD A CAMERA BETTER THAN YOU!!" He then leaped from the shower and picked her up and threw her down knocking the wind out of her. (Well not in the medical sense.) Jodi got up and ran into the closet and found Travis' gun. The gun was possibly in a holster, possibly not. She turned on him in the bathroom after coming out of the other side of the closet. She aimed the gun at him hoping he'd stop. He tackled her like a linebacker and she shot him in the head. (That proves self defense.)

She then went into a "fog" and can't remember stabbing and cutting Travis up. This happened because she had been an abused woman by Travis for so long she finally snapped. When the fog lifted she was heading toward the Hoover Dam.

At least that's how I understand it.

Or, what really happened, she stalked TA to death. And she did. No doubt. Fabricated from the beginning.

 

[Colt46]

What an insane day!!! When I left this morning for back-to-back meetings I returned home at 6:00 and they were still at it. I can't believe this judge allowed a case of this magnitude to wind up like a train wreck! The jurors must have been starving - having eaten nothing since lunch; Juan looked like he was ready to drop; the family is exhausted; and they all have to be bright eyed and bushy-tailed tomorrow morning. Thankfully - it's OVER!

Hopefully the jurors will totally disregard the gasbag's testimony - he is nothing more tha ALV with a moustache! Dr. Horn's unfortunate gaffe should not be held against him - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar; and a typo is just a typo. JW's cross was excruciatingly amateurish and painful to watch.

Dr. Hays was a 'steel magnolia'! She made short shrift of the tiger/bear scenario - how can you believe a liar who has no evidence of 'claw marks'?

This jury will see through all the smoke and mirrors from the DT. In the final analysis it doesn't really matter which came first - gunshot or knife. It was premeditated; it was over-kill; JA used TWO weapons to make sure Travis was dead; she lied and covered up her tracks before and after the murder; and most importantly, there was absolutely no evidence of battered woman syndrome or PTSD! Jodi Arias is a crazed psychopath who knew exactly what she was doing and why she did it. Time to smile....and say 'cheese', Jodi!

 

[Mrs G Norris]

There's no diminished responsibility in the states is there .. Can anyone explain then why we had a battle of the psyche experts .. Just to prove fognesia and why someone can have 'battered woman's syndrome' when they never had a single complaint about it or a bruise? Okey dokey .. Good to know.

 

[marlap]

Woke up and now Watching HLN....

Tigers and Bears and Jodis, oh my!

:floorlaugh:

 

[K_Z]

After all the trajectory talk today in trial, I'm left with that vision of the defendant's take on a "linebacker tackle" - no matter what was argued we do know she did not shoot him in defense. jmo

Yes, the "self defense" defense has surely been obscured. And probably that was the plan all along. The DT is hoping just one juror is befuddled.

 

[wasnt_me]

(Bolding mine)

Add to that, it is very, very dry in the Arizona desert. I doubt that moisture would have been a problem. Too bad, though, that JA didn't come up with that gun story earlier... they could have checked that high top shelf for a dust pattern around the gun! Dust is much more of a problem than moisture in the desert.

I'm in the south. We have moisture and we have plenty of dust, too. Moisture is a problem inside some homes, and dust is a problem in some homes. In some homes it isn't. I don't know if works that way in AZ, though. I do know that no matter what, I got moisture in the bathroom after a shower and seeps out to other rooms.

 

[Hatfield]

JMO
I think I figured out how Wilcott could improve tremendously. She can start by not trying to be an expert on every subject even when she knows nothing about them.

Examples:
She thinks she is an expert on these TMI tests and all other tests.
She thinks she is an expert on autopsies.

It is very obvious to the jurors she is not an expert on either of these and her whole approach is to try and toungue twist the witnesses. This is ridiculous. Please sit down.

 

[Third Coast Gal]

I think the defense needs the gunshot first in order to prove self defense. Jodi's stabbing of Travis and nearly decapitating him doesn't qualify as self defense. Shooting him does. JMO

Yes, this, exactly. Defense needs gunshot first because it supports Jodi's story of self-defense (and BWS) and negates pre-meditation. The defense needs this sequence to keep JA from death. Stabbing and slitting throat first contradicts JA's theory of self-defense which in turn supports premeditation. It's a moot point to most of us, because the whole thing is horrific and cruel, regardless of what sequence it happened. But it's legal minutia that makes a big difference in the technical language of the statute that will be the basis for deliberations.

 

[MeeBee]

I hope Juan also focuses on the lack of stippling and burn marks on Travis. Jodi's version is impossible given this one fact. She would have to have been further away than she says or there would to be some sort of barrier between the gun and his head.

I hope that this one or two jurors leaning toward Jodi ultimately employ common sense in the deliberation room. If Jodi's stories are believed, then one would have to have a really illogical belief that Jodi's life and the events leading up to June 4th is just one big, unfortunate coincidence that points to Jodi's premeditating the murder of Travis. It's all too unbelievable.

Also, point out that even though the DT has worked so hard trying to say this diagnosis of BPD is wrong, their own expert found that Jodi had a personality disorder as well, he just didn't specify it. That points to a strong likelihood that Jodi does have a personality disorder. Although, there might be a juror who wants to write that off due to Jodi being stressed by the public accusations and invasion of privacy. Ugh. I just can't over that. Seriously, doesn't it sound like that juror has been watching coverage of the trial to feel that way?

 

[wasnt_me]

I have to agree with you here. My impression is that Horn is so astonished at the lack of understanding of basic anatomy and physiology by the questioning defense atty that he is dismissive/ arrogant.

He could have done SOOOOO much better explaining the intracranial GSW to the jury. A mere "advanced practice nurse" could have done better explaining and teaching, IMO. Docs are not always good at that sort of thing-- some docs tend toward intellectual arrogance, and hate to be questioned.

Horn is unquestionably handsome, and quite intelligent, which is usually a good thing in a witness, but my dominant sense is he is annoyed that he has to keep explaining very simple concepts to the defense atty and jury. Don't get me wrong-- he is quite intelligent, and experienced. But he is annoyed and defensive. I get the sense he is in a hurry to get off the stand. And I worry a lot that if there is one (or more) boneheads on the jury, that he has not "connected" with them as to what he is SUPPOSED to explain.

I like him, because I understand practitioners like him. But I am not at all convinced that the jury "gets" his demeanor. I worry. I'm not at all sure he connected with the jury.

I have to agree. He acted anxious or as if he didnt want to be there. If I remember correctly, wasn't it twice that he had to be taken out of turn or because of his availability, the court's schedule had to change the second time he was on the stand? I'm thinking his demeanor might be because he needed to be somewhere else.

 

[amberjul]

Thanks. I have seen jurors before on this crime shows I watch say things like "we were told not to consider that," etc. So I was wondering about it. I've watched SO many of these types of shows that I can't be specific. But I'd heard of jury instructions being problems for Jury's in coming to their verdicts

Yes, I've heard of that also. It makes sense - if she shot first, you must find A, if she shot last, you must find B. All the arguing in this trial over it could mean that the Defense and Prosecution either anticipate such an instruction, or know it will be given.

Another possibility is if the jury finds the crime heinous enough and find that the order of things pales in comparison to that, they may just trump the judge.

We'll see tomorrow.

 

[wasnt_me]

BBM

:floorlaugh:



This is what the defense theory is from what I've seen so far.

Jodi went to TA's at his invitation the night before she met the guy in Utah. She saw him in the study and they went to bed (sleeping only) In the morning Jodi said she had some discs of pictures from their prior trips. Unfortunately, the discs were scratched and Travis freaked out by grabbing Jodi and bending her over the desk and doing something sexually nasty to her.

After Travis calmed down they went upstairs and had consensual sex and took pictures with Travis' new camera. While Jodi was taking pictures of Travis in the shower she dropped the camera about 2 inches and Travis became enraged screaming; "A FIVE YEAR OLD COULD HOLD A CAMERA BETTER THAN YOU!!" He then leaped from the shower and picked her up and threw her down knocking the wind out of her. (Well not in the medical sense.) Jodi got up and ran into the closet and found Travis' gun. The gun was possibly in a holster, possibly not. She turned on him in the bathroom after coming out of the other side of the closet. She aimed the gun at him hoping he'd stop. He tackled her like a linebacker and she shot him in the head. (That proves self defense.)

She then went into a "fog" and can't remember stabbing and cutting Travis up. This happened because she had been an abused woman by Travis for so long she finally snapped. When the fog lifted she was heading toward the Hoover Dam.

At least that's how I understand it.

Thanks. I'm very aware of her defense story. I was talking about jury instructions.

 

[MeeBee]

Yes, I've heard of that also. It makes sense - if she shot first, you must find A, if she shot last, you must find B. All the arguing in this trial over it could mean that the Defense and Prosecution either anticipate such an instruction, or know it will be given.

Another possibility is if the jury finds the crime heinous enough and find that the order of things pales in comparison to that, they may just trump the judge.

We'll see tomorrow.

That's why I think the jury will get no such instruction. Because the judge has already said the order doesn't matter, but in regards to whether murder one should be on the table of course. But I don't think that'll happen since either way could mean self defense or premeditation.

 

[gngr~snap]

Aww... the panel on HLN just started clapping for Juan... all of them stayed to finish. Also we had fewer commercials the last hour or so. It was nice!