The state Rests in The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #11

[FrayedKnot]

FYI, this is not an attack and certainly not an attack on a poster. I'm asking about the strategy in advising the state to go against their own medical witness. That's the point that was brought up, which I am seeking clarification about from the person who posted.

Okay. My apologies.

It just seemed very confrontational.

My bad.

 

[Jax49]

I was surprised to see the ex girlfriend say that they had fights... that was new. No one ever said that Travis was a saint... he was human. I just dont buy what JA said about having bruises on arms, legs and torso. Lie, Lies, and more LIES!

I wonder if by fights the ex meant physical or just yelling, etc.? On the site "which shall not be named" they're claiming he broke JA's finger sometime earlier in their relationship.

 

[kkdj]

Premeditation occurred when she picked up the weapon, be it the knife or gun, and inflicted an injury which could have caused death. Travis was not armed. Whether she stabbed him in the heart, or shot him in the head, there were also many subsequent injuries which clearly indicate she wanted him to die.

MOO

I would say she premeditated killing him over and over and over again! More than 20 times! Premeditation can happen in a split second and there is a lot more even than a split second to back up planning g to kill him. I don't think the premeditated murder verdict will be a problem.
Jmo

 

[Isabelle]

Right... but how much blood in the skull if the bullet missed the brain and only traveled thru the sinus and jaw. That spray on the sink came from somewhere.

Isn't a ME's his 'medical opinion'?

I don't know how much blood would be in the skull. I'm not sure where the bullet entered, but know it has been said to be somewhere above the right eyebrow (there is a lot of space there and the location would make a difference). The brain is flush with the skull, there is no room for much more than a very little bit of cerebral spinal fluid to prevent shearing against the bone. Yes, the ME did give his 'medical opinion', but his opinion is based on what he saw at autopsy, his knowledge of anatomy and trauma to the body and his experience as an MD. On the other hand, the LE opinion would not be based on any of these elements, since he does not have that experience.

 

[norest4thewicked]

Right... but how much blood in the skull if the bullet missed the brain and only traveled thru the sinus and jaw. That spray on the sink came from somewhere.

Isn't a ME's his 'medical opinion'?

A medical opinion based on studying the bodies of hundreds to thousands of dead human beings vs any of us here on Websleuths with our extremely amateur opinions? I'll take the medical experts opinion any day because it is the only one that scientifically makes sense when you look at the totality of the evidence.

 

[dgfred]

Nancy said on tv that she was using his phone while he was in the shower txting another girl as him. Who was that girl?

 

[Linda7NJ]

The jury must decide whether there was premeditation for a 1st degree conviction. The prosecution has focused on the theft of the gun (the only weapon involved in the premeditation) and called an LE witness to testify about it, to support the premeditation claim. Yet the prosecution also contends that Travis was killed with a knife and totally concedes that they have no idea where the knife came from - including that it came from the scene. There is serious reasonable doubt, imo, that if I supposedly intend to kill someone with a gun and spend the whole day having sex with them and taking pics of it and end up killing them with a knife that may have been on the scene, that the situation arose from a circumstance I didn't anticipate. If I have a gun -- which I do -- I would use it.

Afaik,she's admitted to killing him (by way of her plea only) but not to premeditation. Which would be completely inconsistent with a defense of self-defense.

AGAIN, I think she shot first and that this stabbed first is mistake on the part of the prosecution. We shall see.

IMO if you plan to kill someone and set out to do it with ...lets say, a crappy old gun that jams....during the commission of felony murder the weapon jams ...so you pick up a brick to finish the job ...it's still premeditated murder. You intended and premeditated murder...the weapon or means of murder is irrelevant.

 

[Isabelle]

I would say she premeditated killing him over and over and over again! More than 20 times! Premeditation can happen in a split second and there is a lot more even than a split second to back up planning g to kill him. I don't think the premeditated murder verdict will be a problem.
Jmo

Agree, every time she changed the method she used shows premeditation. Sort of, Oh, you're not dead yet, let's try this. Oh, that didn't work, let's try this. See, now you're dead!

 

[Linda7NJ]

HA! How'd that work out for him? Were they scented crayola crayons?

Lol, no...not scented. Kid was disappointed ....the result was as if the dog had pooped and someone s prinkled confetti

 

[dgfred]

A medical opinion based on studying the bodies of hundreds to thousands of dead human beings vs any of us here on Websleuths with our extremely amateur opinions? I'll take the medical experts opinion any day because it is the only one that scientifically makes sense when you look at the totality of the evidence.

Shouldn't the lead investigator take that approach too? I am not fussing with you, just giving another point of view.

I too do not really care which was first... she planned it all along either way.

I do think she gave him one more chance to change his mind about the trip and the relationship... but I've been wrong before.

 

[Karmady]

So you'd advise the State of AZ to contradict their own medical examiner's testimony because...??? Why would this be a good idea? And the jury should then believe...who?

I think the jury is already wondering who they should believe since they have conflicting conclusions from the lead investigator who has been there at counsel table every day of the trial and the ME who was there for what, a 1/2hour. And I don't think the ME's testimony was so iron-clad that the state couldn't have soft-pedaled it if they wanted to. But they didn't. So now they're stuck with a detective that says shot first, an ME that says stabbed first, and pre-meditation that exclusively supports shot first based on the theft of the gun and one of the last witnesses for the prosecution being the police officer who investigated the theft of the gun.

If you plan to shoot someone with a gun and stage a robbery for that purpose, you will shoot them with that gun unless some circumstance intervenes. I believe there was no intervening circumstance and that she shot him with the gun she brought there for that purpose. The prosecution thinks otherwise. Take it up with them lol

 

[thefragile7393]

She looks down as she describes her last hours with Travis. Keeps looking down a lot as she describes the ninjas. Lying through her teeth.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[dgfred]

IMO if you plan to kill someone and set out to do it with ...lets say, a crappy old gun that jams....during the commission of felony murder the weapon jams ...so you pick up a brick to finish the job ...it's still premeditated murder. You intended and premeditated murder...the weapon or means of murder is irrelevant.

Defense answer:

You only kill someone because they attacked you.

You had the gun in your purse only for protection.

The knife just happened to be nearby.

I ended up using both because of fear/shock/panic.

No premeditation there, right?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Did you notice in the opening statement the defense attorney said Travis got mad and wrestled her to the floor. Okay, so were does the gun come in if she was on the floor?????? And didn't Ryan said he noticed no injuries other than small bandaids covering cuts on her fingers????? jmo

I guess Jodi, with her almost 6 pack, got the best of him in a life and death wrestling match!

 

[norest4thewicked]

Shouldn't the lead investigator take that approach too? I am not fussing with you, just giving another point of view.

I too do not really care which was first... she planned it all along either way.

I do think she gave him one more chance to change his mind about the trip and the relationship... but I've been wrong before.

I wouldn't even begin to judge what approach the investigator took.

But, I agree with you on the fact that it was premeditated, and she confessed to it.

 

[minor4th]

I don't see this as a problem at all. She obviously had access to both a gun and a knife. And, she killed him. And, she used both a gun and a knife.

The jury is also going to have a hard time figuring how there was blood everywhere and he had been stabbed a couple of dozen times and almost completely bled out, but the wound from the gun shot barely bled, of they choose to think he was shot first. AND, we have the medical expert saying that absolutely the gun came last. I don't think that the jury will choose to dismiss the medical expert.

I guess we will see.

He didn't really say absolutely the gun came last. It was a whole lot more ambiguous than that.

I do not think it matters either way for purposes of premeditation or self defense. I'm a little puzzled why the prosecution or defense is making such an issue of it.

 

[dgfred]

She looks down as she describes her last hours with Travis. Keeps looking down a lot as she describes in ninjas. Lying through her teeth.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

She does that during alot of what we know are lies. When she is sure of herself she looks the questioner right in the eyes.

 

[Isabelle]

Lol, no...not scented. Kid was disappointed ....the result was as if the dog had pooped and someone s prinkled confetti

LOL, my kids ate crayola when they were little and had very colorful poop. Was a big big surprise to me!

 

[minor4th]

I think the jury is already wondering who they should believe since they have conflicting conclusions from the lead investigator who has been there at counsel table every day of the trial and the ME who was there for what, a 1/2hour. And I don't think the ME's testimony was so iron-clad that the state couldn't have soft-pedaled it if they wanted to. But they didn't. So now they're stuck with a detective that says shot first, an ME that says stabbed first, and pre-meditation that exclusively supports shot first based on the theft of the gun and one of the last witnesses for the prosecution being the police officer who investigated the theft of the gun.

If you plan to shoot someone with a gun and stage a robbery for that purpose, you will shoot them with that gun unless some circumstance intervenes. I believe there was no intervening circumstance and that she shot him with the gun she brought there for that purpose. The prosecution thinks otherwise. Take it up with them lol

Why is the lead detective sitting at counsel table? That is something I have never seen before and think it's odd.

 

[LambChop]

The fact the victim was stabbed/slashed 27+ times, had his throat sliced open ear to ear and was shot in the head legally proves the charge of premeditation. In that 90 seconds Jodi knew she was killing Travis, intended to kill Travis, and kept going to finish the killing, rather than leave him injured but alive. The victim was "overkilled" which is not usually a factor in self-defense, but is often indicative of a rage killing. The perp's actions after the murder, the coverup, the trying to remove evidence from the scene, not reporting the incident, lying repeatedly about it, etc. show consciousness of guilt. In other words, the perp (Jodi) knew she murdered Travis, intended to murder Travis, and then she attempted to cover it up. That is enough to prove first degree (premeditated) murder and is enough to disprove a self-defense killing.

Plus her actions immediately afterwards will not help her. Her calling him and leaving a voicemail message about attending a play with her.....very cold. And you can't get much colder. jmo