Trial day 31: the defense continues it's case in chief #86

[TotallyObsessed]

Why when I thank a post do I get a pop up window with a yellow exclamation point? It only happens like every other one. Never had this happen in all my years here.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Will someone reassure me that these experts will be undermined by cross? I'm not an experienced trial observer, but I'm afraid these hired guns are going to sell the jury a bill of goods that (maybe the women) will buy.

I'm sure this has been already posted, but I just got to my computer. I think the Time magazine article was a "dumb down" approach to getting credibility of the jury. Unless there are any physicians on the jury, it isn't likely they are familiar with studies and abstracts. I think the DT thinks the jury will latch onto Time magazine because it doesn't make them feel dumb.


Also, Wilmott said psychologists study the brain. Derp. That is not true. They study psychology and personality. They are not brain scientists. If they were they would be called neurologists. If they were experts on brain chemistry they would be Psychiatrists.

WTF. That untruth made me mad.

Having taught high school journalism, I can attest to the fact that most newspapers and news periodicals are geared to the reading comprehension level of an eighth grade education. I would not appreciate having an expert referencing an article in Time Magazine and would definitely feel that said witness is attempting to "dumb down" his/her assertions. :moo:

 

[shiloh42]

Well, that article seems to be more about what happens when someone points a GUN AT you.......which seems to be more fromTravis perspective. I call Bull chit.

Thanks to the original poster for the article, and I totally agree with you. Hooey.

This really does seem like an attempt to defuse "premeditation" which would spare her the DP. Whatever. That I can deal with, I just want her to get LWOP and let her rot.

 

[katiecoolady]

He has zero publications listed, and that's always a big part of a CV. His "licenses and certifications" are pay-as-you-go memberships to professional groups. And his CV appears to stop about a decade ago, with most of his "work" being in the 1970s-90s. No wonder he has to rely on a Time article. Google paid off for him.

I find it hilarious that he lists "FCC Licensed Broadcast Engineer and Announcer, 1961-1966 " on his CV. Completely unrelated to his field. LOL.

Broadcast engineer ok.

 

[LotusPawprint]

This Dr. Samuel is a joke.. Treatment Strategies for Sex Offenders? Please..

He is out to make money assessing sex offenders because they are a lot of em. Ambulance chaser with the worse scum bags on earth.. Sex offenders.. Oh gawd..

Then to top it off he does sex therapy? Oh help.. something is wrong with this dude.. big time..My intuition is blinking LOUD!!! Not my opinion my intuition

I agree. And.. I'm not sure where all he's going to go and what limits AL has on her testimony, but the dispicable and false sexual accusations JA has made against Travis are concerning with these "experts".

We know she testified that a psychologist from California "helped her" "finally" talk about some of those deep dark secrets she kept, and I have a feeling the defense will try sneaking that in as part of the abuse she "suffered''.

It's just so gross and unacceptable to create a fictionally abusive pedophile in death and hire expert liars to mold testimony to promote a murderer's story. These professionals are shameful.

 

[carnnell]

Is this allowed or not?

Let's say Jodi murdered Travis. Thus begins the process. Once it's discovered who her expert is (Dr S. in this case) How about they send me in as a decoy. I present as a patient abused for years by my boyfriend who has now fled (because they won't be able to find him)

Dr S is so nice and treats me for years, totally taken in. Then I am a witness for the prosecution as I have never been abused. This to show he really can't tell real abuse from a patient putting on an act...

I love the idea. I could do it.

That is interesting you share this hypothetical. I forgot what university did a study back in the 1973. A group of psychology students went to mental hospital pretending to exhibit symptoms of schizophrenia. Believe it or not they fooled the psychiatrists and admitted.

It was written up as a study leaving out the name of the hospital of course.

I chuckled when I read your post because it reminded of that study way back then. Found the study:

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment"]Rosenhan experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[scorpio24]

Good point. Does anyone know if now that Samuels has changed report, can Juan impeach him by using earlier report and interview to state that his opinion has changed...recently...like since Cross!?

The defense attorney said that he had NOT changed his findings, but, apparently, JM concluded from the PowerPoint presentation (which was put together this morning. <Wink> <Wink!>) that he HAD indeed changed some things since he interviewed him. I believe he can use his original report and his original statements from 2011 to impeach him. "Do you remember telling me..."

It makes sense. JA can't keep her story straight. I'm sure he had to adjust his findings, too.

I'm quite sure JM will make good use of his 2 hours with Dr. Samuels. I wouldn't want to be HIM right now.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Rule 15.6. Continuing duty to disclose; final disclosure deadline; extension


a. Continuing Duties. The duties prescribed in this rule shall be continuing duties and each party shall make additional disclosure, seasonably, whenever new or different information subject to disclosure is discovered.

b. Additional Disclosure. Any party that determines additional disclosure may be forthcoming within 30 days of trial shall immediately notify both the court and the other parties of the circumstances and when the disclosure will be available.

c. Final Deadline for Disclosure. Unless otherwise permitted, all disclosure required by this rule shall be completed at least seven days prior to trial.

d. Disclosure After the Final Deadline. A party seeking to use material and information not disclosed at least seven days prior to trial shall obtain leave of court by motion, supported by affidavit, to extend the time for disclosure and use the material or information. If the court finds that the material or information could not have been discovered or disclosed earlier even with due diligence and the material or information was disclosed immediately upon its discovery, the court shall grant a reasonable extension to complete the disclosure and grant leave to use the material or information. Absent such a finding, the court may either deny leave or grant a reasonable extension to complete the disclosure and leave to use the material or information, and if granted the court may impose any sanction other than preclusion or dismissal listed in Rule 15.7.

e. Extension of Time for Scientific Evidence. Upon a motion filed prior to the final deadline for disclosure in Rule 15.6(c), supported by affidavit from a crime laboratory representative or other scientific expert that additional time is needed to complete scientific or other testing, or reports based thereon, and specifying the additional time needed, the Court shall, unless it finds that the request for extension resulted from dilatory conduct, neglect, or other improper reason on the part of the moving party or person listed in Rule 15.1(f) or 15.2(f), grant a reasonable extension in which to complete the disclosure. The period of time of the extension shall be excluded by the court from all time periods prescribed in Rules 15.1(c) 15.1(e), 15.2 (d), 15.2(e), 15.6(b) and 15.6(c).

Hmmm. Judge should exclude testimony then.

 

[paperwing]

The camera strap was found still in the box in the plastic wrap it comes in when purchased.

You're right. I'm still not completely convinced JA didn't use her own - she had at least 2 other cameras with her - and it's possible the mechanism to attach/clip on the strap could be used on different camera brands. Just a thought... Don't think it matters at this point, though - except to ensure that her hands were free at all times - both of them - and that it's hard to drop a camera that's on a strap around one's neck. But there's no way to prove it so... there you go.

 

[katiecoolady]

Anyone watch Dee Dee Moore murder trial in Tampa? She murdered Abraham Shakespeare, taking what was left of his lottery winnings & all assets.
Judge Emmett Battles did not suffer fools, nor tolerate drama - from anyone! Told defendant "you are to compose yourself!" when she would sob for the jury..And "You are to stop! Do you understand me?" when she made eye contact with jury & shook her head at them during testimony.. No one crossed him, it was clear who was in charge!

I love him sight unseen.

 

[writer7]

There are definitely fields of psychology that are directly related to neurology. I even had to take neuro in my undergrad degree in psychology because my school turned out a lot of graduates who went on to doctorates in neuropsych. I was going to do graduate work in research, btw, so neither field is terribly related to clinical psych, which is what most folks think of when they think of psychology.

Having said that, this expert dude's CV doesn't show any study of neuropsych. 'Sexology' and the like are definitely in the realm of clinical psych, unless he was an actual researcher in that area.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Why when I thank a post do I get a pop up window with a yellow exclamation point? It only happens like every other one. Never had this happen in all my years here.

Keep getting that too. It says something like "message from website". First time I got it, I thought it meant I had a PM. Ha!

 

[magpie]

Morning YouTube is up. Is it OK to put the link here? I apologize in advance to the Mods if it's not OK... pls remove it if not OK. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DkP9Nqqwhg

 

[katiewonders]

Anyone watch Dee Dee Moore murder trial in Tampa? She murdered Abraham Shakespeare, taking what was left of his lottery winnings & all assets.
Judge Emmett Battles did not suffer fools, nor tolerate drama - from anyone! Told defendant "you are to compose yourself!" when she would sob for the jury..And "You are to stop! Do you understand me?" when she made eye contact with jury & shook her head at them during testimony.. No one crossed him, it was clear who was in charge!

You know what's cool? If she had kept it up and not listened, I think the judge could have sent her to another room to watch the proceedings via closed circuit TV. A defendant has the right to confront their accusers, but that doesn't mean that has to happen in person, or so I think. lol.

 

[pufnstuf]

Thanks for that link. There are a few things that I don't see as being that helpful to the defense. For example:

"Under sudden attack, the brain does not work the way we think it will. Millbern has seen grown men freeze under threat, like statues dropped onto the set of a horror movie. He has struggled to perform simple functions at shooting scenes, like unlocking a switch on a submachine gun while directing people to safety. &#8220;I have heard arguments that an armed teacher could and would respond to an active shooter in the same way a cop would. That they would hear gunshots, run toward the sound and then engage the shooter,&#8221; Millbern writes in an e-mail from Baghdad, where he now works as a bomb-detection K-9 handler. &#8220;I think this is very unrealistic.&#8221;

==============================================

Jodi did not freeze under threat. Quite the opposite. She was a killing machine.

This article would apply more to Travis than Jodi. He was under sudden attack. She committed premeditated murder against him--she was prepared for what happened. The Time article explains his reaction more than hers... except that he did not live to tell about it.

 

[shiloh42]

JMHO, I think that the judge took the break now to allow for both sides to determine what sort of compromise they are willing to reach, and for she herself to take time to think over the matter and how to proceed.

That's what she meant about dealing with it outside of court with motions. Seems like they all need some time to determine how and if this expert's opinion/testimony has changed. I think that the powerpoint was cooked up last night by the expert at the request of the defense. They need his special help because it's been going badly.

I trust JM to find the holes in the expert's theory/research/testimony and point them out to the jury.

I agree. I also think, as has been said, she's being very careful because this is a DP case, and she doesn't want it overturned on appeal.

All in all, I'd rather have delays than a conviction overturned on appeal and have to go through all this again.

 

[katiewonders]

Keep getting that too. It says something like "message from website". First time I got it, I thought it meant I had a PM. Ha!

I was afraid to click on the one I got, I thought it might be a computer virus. Mods - is this pop-up message legit?

 

[katiecoolady]

With my limited reading on Samuels here and on my iPhone I'm concluding he's just a slightly more edified version of Gus Searcy.

 

[scorpio24]

There are definitely fields of psychology that are directly related to neurology. I even had to take neuro in my undergrad degree in psychology because my school turned out a lot of graduates who went on to doctorates in neuropsych. I was going to do graduate work in research, btw, so neither field is terribly related to clinical psych, which is what most folks think of when they think of psychology.

Having said that, this expert dude's CV doesn't show any study of neuropsych. 'Sexology' and the like are definitely in the realm of clinical psych, unless he was an actual researcher in that area.

Don't worry! The defendant in this case has researched that area quite thoroughly! :floorlaugh:

 

[AZWatcher]

So sick of all this damned subterfuge. People don't stage robberies and steal guns to protect themselves. A naked person with a bullet in their head is not a threat. People who kill in self defense don't go to great lengths (within seconds of said act) to cover up the MURDER. I understand the importance of due process in a death penalty case but this is becoming a GD circus.

ETA I know all of this because I read it in TIME magazine.