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

[nursebeeme]

the sequence

the defense is going to try to say that she shot him first in self defense.

good luck with that.. she stabbed him 27 times after that and almost decapitated him.

:moo:
I am still not sure why they want the sequence in.. I think it has to do with what the PA knows about the DT strategy and any experts they have coming into play after the break

 

[nursebeeme]

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

there is a sequence poll thread.. but the debate has to stay here.

 

[norest4thewicked]

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

IMO the ME leaves some openings to doubt.

He said it in the very beginning...right when she was first arrested. It was based on her statement about the "ninjas" and that they shot him first. It doesn't mean that he still believes it or even believed it past 2008. It was just a supposition based on what she told him about that night.

 

[callyn]

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:

I'd love to see that diagram showing the bullet missing the brain. Was that posted last night also?

I am w/you on the hunky ME :blushing:

 

[Linda7NJ]

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.

I think with the ME's testimony and the blood evidence and bullet casing the totality IMO points to the gunshot being last and Travis was dead or darn close to deAd when that shot was fired.

I don't think it was insurance. I think she knew he was going to die. She shot him to make it appear that two people were involved. It was staging. Nothing more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

His journals were stolen? So was she in Mesa to do that as well the week before?

I must have missed something. His journals were stolen? How do you know it was prior to the murder? If this is fact then there might be something in those journal entries of importance.

 

[Madeleine74]

If lay people on the Interwebs are questioning a medical examiner with advanced medical and pathological training, 20+ years experience and having personally conducted thousands of autopsies and instead are using their own opinion on what happened in the case (based on I guess watching a few seasons of CSI?) then perhaps fear of the jury doing the exact same thing is well-founded.

I just don't get it. I do not understand the thinking that goes behind the "I know better than the trained experts because I once saw/heard/read about...."

Is it that difficult for lay people to just listen to testimony and see how a case unfurls? Do people secretly (or not so secretly) think they are crime scene detectives and investigators who are going to swoop in and solve the mystery?!? If the jurors do anything like this then that's the downfall with the justice system, IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

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

Nah, not in my opinion. Just something to talk about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LambChop]

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

IMO the ME leaves some openings to doubt.

I don't think the ME left any doubt it was the defense attorney that tried to create doubt and he was quite firm about his findings. What we believe won't carry any weight either way. The jury has to go by what they are given as evidence. jmo

 

[nursebeeme]

If lay people on the Interwebs are questioning a medical examiner with advanced medical and pathological training, 20+ years experience and having personally conducted thousands of autopsies and instead are using their own opinion on what happened in the case (based on I guess watching a few seasons of CSI?) then perhaps fear of the jury doing the exact same thing is well-founded.

I just don't get it. I do not understand the thinking that goes behind the "I know better than the trained experts because I once saw/heard/read about...."

Is it that difficult for lay people to just listen to testimony and see how a case unfurls? Do people secretly (or not so secretly) think they are crime scene detectives and investigators who are going to swoop in and solve the mystery?!? If the jurors do anything like this then that's the downfall with the justice system, IMO.

it is open for discussion.

 

[Really?]

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

ok so what shall we discuss? Lady bits????

LOL

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'd love to see that diagram showing the bullet missing the brain. Was that posted last night also?

I am w/you on the hunky ME :blushing:

Diagram? It must have been eaten by a unicorn. Never saw it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[polleypockets]

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:

well one of the thing martinez said in court was the fact she shot him after he was did caused the extreme cruelty for the DP - and personally if she shot him after he was already dead, then there is no chance she can say it was self defense - but if keeps on coming at her until she finally kills him, i'm afraid it leaves a window open for possible self defense - imo - and i think thats why they are being so careful to prove that - imo

 

[Jax49]

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?

There are, how to say this, "devices" which can be used on a man's junk to constrict blood flow to maintain an erection. Something like that might have caused the unusual color in his photo.

I searched amazon today and got a real education. Not sure how to say what search I used. Think a male bird and a ring.

I have no clue on the other areas of redness, but I see them also. Maybe more duct tape had been applied and removed???

 

[Side_eye Syd]

That case happened where I live. The abuse isn't agreed upon by everyone but one thing for sure, he wasn't abusing her that night. She had him tied to the bed. That was the state's position and the jury agreed.

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. They did, indeed just show him tied to the bed. Interestingly, she was a small woman (or so they say in this Lifetime movie) & dragged his body from the bedroom all the way through the house & out to the backyard where she buried him. That's a lot of adrenaline.

 

[Madeleine74]

it is open for discussion.

I hope the jury at least listens to and pays attention to the experts who are testifying. That is the best and most compelling evidence to understand what happened to Travis.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If lay people on the Interwebs are questioning a medical examiner with advanced medical and pathological training, 20+ years experience and having personally conducted thousands of autopsies and instead are using their own opinion on what happened in the case (based on I guess watching a few seasons of CSI?) then perhaps fear of the jury doing the exact same thing is well-founded.

I just don't get it. I do not understand the thinking that goes behind the "I know better than the trained experts because I once saw/heard/read about...."

Is it that difficult for lay people to just listen to testimony and see how a case unfurls? Do people secretly (or not so secretly) think they are crime scene detectives and investigators who are going to swoop in and solve the mystery?!? If the jurors do anything like this then that's the downfall with the justice system, IMO.

Bingo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know why it would be this, but my first thought around her genital region was iodine. But honestly, I can't make anything make any sense. Thing is tho, something does!
Jmo
Oh! I wonder if it was tastee stuff stains for oral sex!

 

[minor4th]

yes..

If the dragging photo was one of the deleted photos, then it's more puzzling that she left the camera behind.

As a "professional photographer" - even if she thought she was home free by deleting the murder pics, certainly she knows that the others are timestamped and would place her at Travis' house on the day of his murder. WTH??

 

[LambChop]

If lay people on the Interwebs are questioning a medical examiner with advanced medical and pathological training, 20+ years experience and having personally conducted thousands of autopsies and instead are using their own opinion on what happened in the case (based on I guess watching a few seasons of CSI?) then perhaps fear of the jury doing the exact same thing is well-founded.

I just don't get it. I do not understand the thinking that goes behind the "I know better than the trained experts because I once saw/heard/read about...."

Is it that difficult for lay people to just listen to testimony and see how a case unfurls? Do people secretly (or not so secretly) think they are crime scene detectives and investigators who are going to swoop in and solve the mystery?!? If the jurors do anything like this then that's the downfall with the justice system, IMO.

Many people just do not trust the system. Detectives make mistakes in their investigations, big or small they are bound to get something wrong, or are mistaken. It happens. But a medical expert who testifies in court on a DP case, I'll bet he went over that autopsy with a fine tooth comb to make sure he made no mistakes prior to court. I was impressed with him. He clearly knew what he was talking about and made sense. jmo