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

[LinasK]

I wonder if it was to make it seem like it wasn't her in case anyone saw her at Travis' house? She could say, oh it wasn't me that was there, I was blonde then. Which obviously wouldn't have worked anyway since they were able to recover the pictures showing she was there.

Yup! She asked the detective in her interview, "You sure it was me?" She didn't count on the DNA from her hair being left there- color being irrelevant to DNA!!!

Could've been double motive, claim "I was a blonde" and attempt to throw Mimi under the bus.

 

[LambChop]

It isn't so clear cut about the incapacitating... or the lead investigator wouldn't think he was shot first.

The lead investigator was going by what Jodi said about the ninjas. ME's do not always make their determinations in a couple of days. It often takes months. Flores clearly thought JA was telling the truth about the sequencing of what happened because the rest of her story matched what information they did know because of the pictures. He just bought her version of the event. ME said, no, that is not what happened. Detectives aren't doctors so he would not know for sure. jmo

 

[nursebeeme]

Oh that blood? ...was her bathing his dog. Eyeroll lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope they play this clip back on cross.

re: how her blood is there.

 

[callyn]

it was last nite - saying it was possible to go in front of the brain in between brain and skull, or that it stayed in the sinus cavity the entire time

I stated last night that the brain is flush with the skull in the forehead area and that if a bullet penetrated the skull then it also penetrated the brain. Someone who said he had worked 8 years in neuro 'kindly informed me' in no uncertain terms, that I didn't know what I was talking about, that the brain was not flush with the skull, that the brain moves around according to a person's position and etc.

I stick with my opinion. And I just read the transcript of the questioning of the ME and he states the same thing. The brain is flush against the skull in the forehead area in a young person.

We know it didn't remain in a sinus cavity the whole time because it was found in the left jaw.

 

[LinasK]

I hope they play this clip back on cross.

re: how her blood is there.

Boy, do I feel sorry for the dog!!!

 

[Madeleine74]

But he has seen every morsel of evidence... and the wounds, and has much experience too.

IMO the ME leaves some openings to doubt.

Bottomline: Flores cannot testify to what caused TA's death, he cannot detail all of TA's injuries, he cannot opine on the bullet's trajectory through TA's head and what structures would have been affected. He has seen most of the evidence, but he wasn't standing over TA's body at autopsy and seeing what the M.E. saw. He heard what was being said and he was watching from a distance. Flores is not a doctor and not an M.E. and as such his "opinion" is not based on the medical evidence.

 

[audreyparker]

Hey nurse,
If you draw a line from right above the eyebrow to the left cheek you can almost see it would have only nicked the brain IMO. Still shocking and incapacitating... but not a killer IMO. I feel like that is where the sink spray came from... and then she came back at him with the knife and struck his back in the tight grouping. Went down and tried to make it down the hall.
Neck wound ended that. Only my opinion

I'm trying to figure out how she could do that without standing in front of him? There was no noticeable void in the blood spatter, so how could she have shot him in the face without standing in front of him at the sink?

I'm probably misunderstanding, if so,sorry!

 

[Really?]

Her particular trajectory happened to miraculously go through a path in the brain that didn't affect her in the same way, though she is going through physical therapy and she's lucky to be alive.

The point isn't that some gunshots don't kill people and the point is not that some people get shot and are still okay, the point is what this medical examiner testified to about one person and one gunshot to that one person's head and the trajectory of that one shot.

Why stories of this guy or that other girl who once got shot is relevant to what happened to Travis Alexander is beyond my understanding. It has no bearing on Travis's wounds.

Why the medical examiner is either not believed or not trusted or his testimony is treated as if he picked a diagnostic opinion out of a hat is confusing. The things he was certain about he was 100% certain about. That bullet went through TA's brain. It just did.

My girl with the scar story was to back up my assertion that ( IMO ) Travis was shot first.....got out of the shower......spit blood onto the mirror whilst being stabbed in the back....

 

[polleypockets]

I stated last night that the brain is flush with the skull in the forehead area and that if a bullet penetrated the skull then it also penetrated the brain. Someone who said he had worked 8 years in neuro 'kindly informed me' in no uncertain terms, that I didn't know what I was talking about, that the brain was not flush with the skull, that the brain moves around according to a person's position and etc.

I stick with my opinion. And I just read the transcript of the questioning of the ME and he states the same thing. The brain is flush against the skull in the forehead area in a young person.

We know it didn't remain in a sinus cavity the whole time because it was found in the left jaw.

lol - i am w/ you - i meant to say ppl were saying.... and some one posted i pic trying to show the trajectory missed the brain - i am 100% on team hunky ME :great:

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm trying to figure out how she could do that without standing in front of him? There was no noticeable void in the blood spatter, so how could she have shot him in the face without standing in front of him at the sink?

I'm probably misunderstanding, if so,sorry!

IMO he was down on the ground when shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

I thought Jodi's was odd, extra bits and stuff


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes and what was all the redness? Travis's was all red too! Also, he had some red line around his waist area. Maybe around his neck too. What the heck was going on?

 

[Really?]

Hey nurse,
If you draw a line from right above the eyebrow to the left cheek you can almost see it would have only nicked the brain IMO. Still shocking and incapacitating... but not a killer IMO. I feel like that is where the sink spray came from... and then she came back at him with the knife and struck his back in the tight grouping. Went down and tried to make it down the hall.
Neck wound ended that. Only my opinion

This is exactly how I imagine it. Thanks:rocker:

 

[katiecoolady]

Ok color me dumb but I don't understand the importance of understanding the sequence of the wounds.

For the DP sentence it has to qualify as "heinous, cruel and depraved". The cruel part has to do with the suffering of the victim. I think the defensive wounds and obvious attempts to flee obviously meet that criteria. And all the wounds/methods of killing him.

I think the crime scene itself just speaks to all of those criteria.

And the premeditation also is met (well from the moment she stole the gun and ALL of the other acts leading up to killing him) by the defensive wounds.

Is it just to satisfy a curiosity or do you think it's something that could hang up the jury in some way? :waitasec:

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes and what was all the redness? Travis's was all red too! Also, he had some red line around his waist area. Maybe around his neck too. What the heck was going on?

Koolaide? Lol I have no idea! It's very strange tho right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Karmady]

Hey nurse,
If you draw a line from right above the eyebrow to the left cheek you can almost see it would have only nicked the brain IMO. Still shocking and incapacitating... but not a killer IMO. I feel like that is where the sink spray came from... and then she came back at him with the knife and struck his back in the tight grouping. Went down and tried to make it down the hall.
Neck wound ended that. Only my opinion

ITA. Yes, the bullet may have "passed through" a tiny portion of the temporal lobe, but not mostly. Blood was from him thinking wtf just happened, going to the mirror to look, and her not being there because the gun jammed on the second round and she was racing off to find the knife to make sure he wouldn't live to tell about it.

 

[audreyparker]

IMO he was down on the ground when shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

that's exactly what I think - he had to be lower than her for trajectory to work. Otherwise, the bullet would have gone up, not down. She could not have shot him in front of the sink.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Ok color me dumb but I don't understand the importance of understanding the sequence of the wounds.

For the DP sentence it has to qualify as "heinous, cruel and depraved". The cruel part has to do with the suffering of the victim. I think the defensive wounds and obvious attempts to flee obviously meet that criteria. And all the wounds/methods of killing him.

I think the crime scene itself just speaks to all of those criteria.

And the premeditation also is met (well from the moment she stole the gun and ALL of the other acts leading up to killing him) by the defensive wounds.

Is it just to satisfy a curiosity or do you think it's something that could hang up the jury in some way? :waitasec:

Me neither...but we gotta discuss something over this long break!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TigerBalm]

Is there any chance a thread can be opened to debate which injury was inflicted first.
The debate is taking up so much from the threads.
TIA

 

[4Jacy]

Oh that blood? ...was her bathing his dog. Eyeroll lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For as "bright" as some people suggested she was, actually, she was DTAD.

 

[katiecoolady]

Me neither...but we gotta discuss something over this long break!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh I'm all up for hashing and rehashing...I just was wondering if there was some evidentiary value in definitively understanding this.