Trial break: The State vs Jodi Arias; trial resumes 4 February 2013

[minor4th]

thats the impression i got - but i have a question, when the defense accidently showed those pics - were they already entered into evidence and approved?? or is the defense just trying to get a mistrial? - since there was no context given at all to those pics

They were not entered into evidence or approved. I don't think the defense is trying to get a mistrial; I think they are trying to sneak in evidence without laying a proper foundation. At this point I do not know if it was just sloppy lawyering or if it was an intentional effort to get inflammatory pics in front of the jury without them being properly admitted. That remains to be seen.

I also think it's likely the judge had no idea that the pics might have been seen by the jury. I'm not sure the jury saw them. I don't even think Juan knew the pics might have been seen by the jury. I can't really tell where the jury is in relation to the witness.

 

[manzana]

Minor4th,

I think you should look at this for clarification and supports what you posted.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8789922&postcount=83"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Trial break: The State vs Jodi Arias; trial resumes 4 February 2013[/ame]

 

[ohiogirl]

I HAVE to believe the discussion of this is what caused the delay in the trial, yet the judge let it be shown???
If most on here don't understand, and don't have you, txbluesman, to explain, how can we expect a jury of conservative "older" peeps to figure this out? Maybe you should offer your services. I'd be fine with that. lol

If there is no cooreation shown to the jury as to how this makes any difference, they will be more likely to disregard because there is nothing shown to be relevant, imo. That was my best Law and Order, Jack Mccoy, interpretation.

"Depraved Indifference"!:rocker:

 

[Karmady]

I'm not going to keep going back and forth on this because I'll admit I am no expert in this area, so I'll leave it to more knowledgeable folks than me. But here is why I thought it was an internal hard drive from a lap top:

Agreed. I'm no expert on it either and I wasn't trying to determine internal/external. I was just trying to figure out whether the fact that the data on the drive did not come from Travis's laptop had been established. I don't think it has and that's what the op's were saying.

Just jumping off your post since it was sequential. Not calling you out on the topic

 

[txbluesman]

Hey everyone! New here, but avid follower of this case.

I have not seen this mentioned here so I'll raise the point. Anyone take note of the fact that a freeweb proxy server was invoked just prior to Travis's gmail account being accessed. A proxy server hides the identity of a user to help make it more difficult to backtrack and see what sites they're hitting.

Now...why would Travis need to hide his own identity while checking his own email? The mystery user seems obvious to me.

And the proxy server and gmail were logged at 4am a few hours before they had sex. Isn't that the same time Jodi told police she arrived at Travis's house? She got in around 4am, they slept in and then had sex, and then she went Lizzie Borden on him.

Who's to say TA was even awake when she got there. She obviously had a key as Lisa Andrews testified Jodi would let herself in unannounced. Who's to say she didn't go Columbo on his computer while he was sleeping.

As someone mentioned earlier, I really hope State did forensics on her computer & her grandparents to see if she used that same web proxy often and if any records exist on her computer for the alias DeAnna Reed.

Hi Stolat and welcome, although I feel weird welcoming you as I'm sorta new here myself.

You're right about the proxy, the accounts given by Jodi, etc. Unfortunately, although much "could" have been done in the way of computer forensics, I don't think much "was" done. As far as I can tell, TA's home/work computer was gone through pretty well and some phone records were, surprisingly, dug up and put to good use. Otherwise, I think there is a lot we're never going to know about who was using whose computer.

Deanna Reed, as far as I know, is a friend to whom he willed his dog. When her name came up today regarding the laptop, someone brought up that she could have been the previous owner or she could have set the laptop up for him if he wasn't tech savvy enough to do it himself.

Thanks for your insight into this subject. :rocker:

 

[gitana1]

I saw her in person and I don't think she looks healthy at all. In fact, if I saw her in an unrelated setting I'd wonder what her issues were. She is obviously very, very angry. And while that is understandable under the circumstances, I think the victims' rights advocate should help her deal with her anger if they are not. Travis isn't coming back and her anger about that is not positive for her as a person in her own right, imo.

Wow. That seems pretty harsh. Have you ever had someone you loved deeply ripped from you in such a disgusting manner as murder?

I have witnessed a websleuth friend going through the daily horror of a murder trial as she waited for justice for her loved one. To see and hear the utter pain she was going through, to witness her absolute fragility yet her inner strength that was born of necessity, to feel her anguish and rage and also compassion for the family of the murderer, well, it was so painful to witness and not to be able to take that pain away.

Travis' family are simply trying to survive each moment, They are hanging on by a thread and tortured each day of this trial. Each day. This is not the time for psychobabble for them. They just need help surviving to the next minute.

Like I said, jodi is lucky Travis wasn't my brother: Pen and eyes. That's all I have to say.

Hopefully this trial will end with a result that can help Travis' family to heal. But their pain and anguish is completely normal and understandable.

I want to add that this is a victim friendly site. These poor people are victims.

Hey everyone! New here, but avid follower of this case.

I have not seen this mentioned here so I'll raise the point. Anyone take note of the fact that a freeweb proxy server was invoked just prior to Travis's gmail account being accessed. A proxy server hides the identity of a user to help make it more difficult to backtrack and see what sites they're hitting.

Now...why would Travis need to hide his own identity while checking his own email? The mystery user seems obvious to me.

And the proxy server and gmail were logged at 4am a few hours before they had sex. Isn't that the same time Jodi told police she arrived at Travis's house? She got in around 4am, they slept in and then had sex, and then she went Lizzie Borden on him.

Who's to say TA was even awake when she got there. She obviously had a key as Lisa Andrews testified Jodi would let herself in unannounced. Who's to say she didn't go Columbo on his computer while he was sleeping.

As someone mentioned earlier, I really hope State did forensics on her computer & her grandparents to see if she used that same web proxy often and if any records exist on her computer for the alias DeAnna Reed.

WELCOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you let the prosecutor's office know? I wouldn't want another casey anthony outcome to happen.

 

[katiecoolady]

I have to disagree. I think she is a very good judge and today seemed particularly rough/frustrating for her. It's not the judge's fault the defense team pulled that stunt any more than she is responsible for JM flashing the autopsy picture yesterday. The judge has been very fair to both sides. What's her name Willie-lady (the female defense atty) did that on purpose! WE know that she did!

Hi Lacey,

I know Beth K has been VERY frustrated with the Judge's pulling so many things "in camera" as she said. It's her job to report and a lot of this trial is being kept from the public. Other than that I don't have complaints with her. I think it's Juan Martinez who's Alpha Dogging that courtroom anyway.

 

[Laceybug]

Thats the point. It isnt even evidence that is allowed yet since it is under objection. The damage has been done. Jury has seen them and more importantly got an assumption from the defense that these came from his computer and were "bad pics". Judge should have stopped this in its tracks IMO.

Based on the juror questions presented... I'm going to give this jury credit. I don't think they are dumb and if WE recognize what Wilmott tried to do today.. the jury surely picked up on it too. In fact... they may have been insulted by having willies thrown in their face.
When Juan tossed that picture up there... it was an omg moment... BUT it was to get the focus off high school make out sessions to why they are really there. Willie pics do not have that same effect. Im thinking the jury saw right through it. MOO *faith*

 

[Karmady]

Who are you to say, while she's sitting in a courtroom for her brother's murder trial that she's not moving on "positively" according to YOU? Maybe the fact that she could put her business on hold (yes she's a business woman) and even GET to trial is a "positive" move for her. Maybe the fact that she's even survived these four years is the most "positive " she can be. At this stage. Maybe she's counseling other "survivors" at her church for all you know, which is near to nothing. You do not know this person, I don't think. At least I hope you don't.

I'm not going to belabor this point with your insensitivity.

I will however give you a free one way ticket to my ignore feature. Congratulations, you're the first.

I have no space for this kind of attitude.

I wouldn't have commented if I didn't know about being a victim. "Victims" have all kinds of attitudes. Some more or less productive then others, imo.

 

[minor4th]

Minor4th,

I think you should look at this for clarification and supports what you posted.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Trial break: The State vs Jodi Arias; trial resumes 4 February 2013

I did look, but I'm an idiot in this area so I need some additional explaining. I responded to your post with more questions but I think you missed it. See here:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8790012&postcount=108"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Trial break: The State vs Jodi Arias; trial resumes 4 February 2013[/ame]

 

[katiecoolady]

katie -- It sounds like you are being called to this position -- if it is volunteer, you could prolly set your own hours -- figure the best times to be out of the house. If it is part-time paid (which it prolly is), then you may be able to negotiate your preferred hours as well.

I'm sure many of us here would want to see you in the position since you have been there are done it, so sorry to say -- but at least some time has passed so you wouldn't be just recently stung by it (although the wound and anger and hurt will always be there). This sounds like it needs you & your experience. That's MO only. You will do what you can, when you can -- that's the best way to approach it, again JMO. I wish strength and wisdom to you here, but don't forget about yourself.

I have been asked before to volunteer with victims and honestly with the DP sentence you keep getting dragged back in to the process (we had another mini trial in 2009 I think?) and my Dad and I had to testify all over again. You just want to go along with your fine life and enjoy yourself never thinking of another murder again. Then something like this crime happens in your own back yard and you feel this yearning to want to reach out and help others. I think this is a very normal response to tragedy and maybe this time I will move in that direction and be able to help someone else as I've been helped myself.

 

[Stolat]

What it means to me is that the hard drive the expert was testifying about -- the one where he recovered the pics -- did not belong to Travis (that we know of) and has no relevance.

I can support your notion that the drive was not from Travis's laptop. But based on that theory alone, it is premature and unsupported to deduct that definitively disqualifies it as belonging to Travis. We no more know that it isn't his than we know it is his. We only know what computer it did not come from. I have 3 laptops and 2 desktops because I keep upgrading, No reason to believe he had only one computer in his house.

It will be interesting to find out where it came from and who the owner is.

 

[Hatfield]

I know others have expressed this concern of her being too thin but honestly in person she looks much healthier. On TV we are only seeing her from the face up basically but she's got a nice figure and isn't skinny looking in person. She's just absolutely grief stricken in court. I have also seen her smiling too and her face totally changes...she's a very pretty gal.

Thanks Katie for all your posts. I feel so bad for her and her family. One thing for sure is that there is overwhelming support of Travis and most everyone is seeing that the defense is just smoke and mirrors and pulling the same crap that happened in the KC trial. They dont have to worry about the public thinking bad about travis, as there has been no evidence to support that nonsense.

Hang in there.

 

[Laceybug]

Hi Lacey,

I know Beth K has been VERY frustrated with the Judge's pulling so many things "in camera" as she said. It's her job to report and a lot of this trial is being kept from the public. Other than that I don't have complaints with her. I think it's Juan Martinez who's Alpha Dogging that courtroom anyway.

Hi Katie! I've read your posts... I just haven't found the words yet to respond. My heart goes out to you for all that you have been through and I so appreciate the insight you share with all of us here. Thank you so much!! You've become sort of a big sister here and I wish I could give you a big hug!!

I think right now with everything that is going on the past few days emotions are very high... frustrations are high... and it has to be so stressful not being able to give her undivided attention to this case and with all the delays...I think you even said yesterday there was a certain 'feel' in the courtroom. I sure wouldnt want to be in her shoes. moo

 

[suspicious1]

hello, everyone.. i am new here.. but i must admit that i've been lurking for the past few days, and am still not completely caught up on some of the details (for instance, i still have not watches the police interrogation, on july 15th, i think it was?) ... you are all amazing, by the way. incredibly intelligent, thought provoking, funny, and genuinely caring people.. if, universe forbid, something awful ever happened to me or my family, i would want y'all to be giving my grief such powerful consideration.

now to try to contribute...

in reference to today's (seemingly irrelevant) male appendage photos, does anyone know what the "time stamp" could be referring to? are they talking about when the photo was taken or when the photo was acquired on the hard drive?

thanks in advance!

I am still trying to catch up....but I was wondering the same thing about the time stamp.

I wonder if it's from the day of the murder? Ijdk

 

[Karmady]

Wow. That seems pretty harsh. Have you ever had someone you loved deeply ripped from you in such a disgusting manner as murder?

I have witnessed a websleuth friend going through the daily horror of a murder trial as she waited for justice for their loved ones. To see and hear the utter pain she was going through, to witness her absolute fragility yet her inner strength that was born of necessity, to feel her anguish and rage and also compassion for the family of the murderer, well, it was so painful to witness and not to be able to take that pain away.

Travis' family are simply trying to survive each moment, They are hanging on by a thread and tortured each day of this trial. Each day. This is not the time for psychobabble for them. They just need help surviving to the next minute.

Like I said, jodi is lucky Travis wasn't my brother: Pen and eyes. That's all I have to say.

Hopefully this trial will end with a result that can help Travis' family to heal. But their pain and anguish is completely normal and understandable.

I want to add that this is a victim friendly site. These poor people are victims.



WELCOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you let the prosecutor's office know? I wouldn't want another casey anthony outcome to happen.

I've had all kinds of insane pain from everything that's discussed on this site daily. From abuse to murder to suicide...all of it. From the time I was a little kid until a couple of years ago. I'm "qualified." But I don't care about that except when I'm called out on it as not having a valid position.

 

[txbluesman]

That is not the type of drive that they were talking about see this post

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/report.php?p=8789922

We never saw the "parts", but the expert did say they were consistent with an external drive enclosure. How we interpret that is not really important as we're really talking about the same thing, a hard disk drive inside an enclosure other than a laptop, intended and designed to be used as a portable device for storing and moving data.

I think we should all be able to agree on most of that.

 

[minor4th]

I can support your notion that the drive was not from Travis's laptop. But based on that theory alone, it is premature and unsupported to deduct that definitively disqualifies it as belonging to Travis. We no more know that it isn't his than we know it is his. We only know what computer it did not come from. I have 3 laptops and 2 desktops because I keep upgrading, No reason to believe he had only one computer in his house.

It will be interesting to find out where it came from and who the owner is.

I agree. We don't know where it came from at all, but initially everyone (including me) was assuming that it was from Travis' laptop because of the way the evidence and testimony were presented.

This may have been a hard drive from another of Travis' laptops, and if that's the case then it was sloppy lawyering because the defense did not elicit that information from the witness.

It's also possible that this was not from a laptop belonging to Travis, in which case it was an intentional attempt to mislead by implication. We don't know -- which is why I said it remains to be seen.

 

[Hatfield]

I am still trying to catch up....but I was wondering the same thing about the time stamp.

I wonder if it's from the day of the murder? Ijdk

I dont know what the dates are, but in the transcript (from past thread), the time stamp they were referring to is the date/time stamp of when the photos were actually taken. I think I read where the witness said he got the time stamp for some of the pics, but not all of them. I dont recall reading where he gave any speciifc values for any of them, but he may have in court. Just not sure.

 

[katiecoolady]

Hi Katie! I've read your posts... I just haven't found the words yet to respond. My heart goes out to you for all that you have been through and I so appreciate the insight you share with all of us here. Thank you so much!! You've become sort of a big sister here and I wish I could give you a big hug!!

I think right now with everything that is going on the past few days emotions are very high... frustrations are high... and it has to be so stressful not being able to give her undivided attention to this case and with all the delays...I think you even said yesterday there was a certain 'feel' in the courtroom. I sure wouldnt want to be in her shoes. moo

I agree completely. And all the while she has to hold in her mind how she doesn't want this verdict overturned on appeal as it WILL be appealed for decades and often on her rulings. I've not seen anything that I think would be valid but doggoneit if they won't argue it. In our case they appealed on the fact I sat in the courtroom after my testimony then testified a couple more times...when the Victims Bill of Rights clearly details how that's valid. Didn't mean they didn't try (and waste people's time and taxpayer dollars in the process). Everything will be appealed on...absolutely everything. So this Judge has to be so careful. No Judge wants to be overturned on their own wrongdoing.

And thank you for that first paragraph too!