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

[corundogs]

OK...quetstion for all of you lawyerly expert types.

If the judge DOES exclude it, is that a basis for appeal?

I mean, after all, do any of us want THAT???????

 

[leebee52]

She strikes me just like JA when caught in a lie. Talks so fast you cannot keep up with her.

Sounds accurate.

 

[seguek9]

The Steubenville rape trial has an 11 hour day planned today...I don't think even seen an 11 hour WEEK yet with this trial!

 

[sweetmop]

I hope that no one on the jury is experiencing financial hardship due to the extensive length of this trial. They probably had no idea that they'd be away from their daily lives for this long. I admire and appreciate their commitment, endurance, and patience.

Oh, but of course there are some, many bprobably, experiencing financial hardship! And this Judge hasn't even acknowleged once to them a thank you for all the time they've given!
I really do not care for this judge!

 

[kaRN]

Sooo...you DX someone with PTSD and continue to see them but you don't treat said disorder?? JA did testify that she had no mental conditions and wasn't receiving treatment for such. So does she or does she not have a mental condition because PTSD would be considered one.

On a lighter note, JW IMHO is really not qualified to deal with anything remotely involving the 'science' of anything should be hoot to listen to.

 

[carnnell]

We need the judge who presided over Phil Spector Trial #1 and #2. He was excellent. I remember when the defense tried these underhanded tricks and he busted them right in front of God and camera. Of course, he sustained them and/or didn't allow it to happen. He was long time judge who was once appellate judge so he knew the law!!!

 

[wsreader]

It takes the defense 30 minutes to tell the judge about this surprise slideshow that the witness just finished up this morning. BS. I've tried to be open minded about the defense team but this move is sneaky and shady. JM is right, they're trying to sneak his testimony in through the back door. This reminds me of another defense team's tactics down in FL... Shame on them.

 

[Ajax]

She reminds me a lot of Perry.....with all the defense love she dispenses. Special smiles for Willmott...

Perry was lenient to the defense to a point with it being a DP case, sure. However, he was also VERY courteous to the jury, punctual, knowledgeable of citations, would correct incorrect motions, kept the court MOVING as much as possible by both extending hours and threatening to hold Saturday court if the attorneys didn't wind things up. So, at least I saw evidence of him doing a job that I don't see this particular judge doing. YMMV, of course.

 

[newsjunkie]

She allowed the re-edited phone sex tape with text so I would be surprised if she doesn't allow this.

The second go round with the sex tape doesn't bug me because that is what the defense wanted to do the first time and Juan objected. So they played it in its entirety.

The jury knows everything that was said on that tape not just what the defense wanted them to hear.

This situation is different and where the judge will lose my support if she allows it in.
:banghead: :furious: :cursing: :burn: :scream: :no: :steamed: :rage:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That ship has sailed to me, Is just a comment that means, I wish would could have taken care of this before, But there is nothing we can do about it now..

I don't think it was a dig at either side.

 

[nightsweet]

Willmott was smirking because she tried to pull a fast one and Juan caught her! Don't $)%# with JM!

 

[JSR]

Rule 15.2.(c) of AZ Criminal Rules

c. Disclosure by Defendant; Scope. Simultaneously with the notice of defenses submitted under Rule 15.2(b), the defendant shall make available to the prosecutor for examination and reproduction the following material and information known to the defendant to be in the possession or control of the defendant:

(1) The names and addresses of all persons, other than that of the defendant, whom the defendant intends to call as witnesses at trial, together with their relevant written or recorded statements;

(2) The names and addresses of experts whom the defendant intends to call at trial, together with the results of the defendant's physical examinations and of scientific tests, experiments or comparisons that have been completed; and

(3) A list of all papers, documents, photographs and other tangible objects that the defendant intends to use at trial.

 

[marciec]

Someone in Juan's office needs to complain - it's long overdue! Surely Juan answers to someone, and that's who needs to remind this judge that, like it or not, she's supposed to administratively control this trial, and her courtroom. There are 18 people sacrificing their INCOME AND TIME, not to mention a grieving family seeking justice.

 

[Kajaa24]

"Your brain under fire" article in Time magazine

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/16/your-brain-in-a-shootout-guns-fear-and-flawed-instincts/

Thanks Claudicici

and may I point out the date ????? 1/16/2013
it seems a rather NEW article...tss tss

 

[Weebles]

If I have this correct Dr Samuels is relying on a Time Magazine article written by a journalist that writes about education, politics and disasters. Her education is a BA in Government.

Can not make this stuff up.

 

[Southern_Meadow]

IMO, using magazine arguments to make a point screams desperation by the DT. I would bet the jury will see it that way.

 

[jojomonkey]

Not necessarily. I think the Judge can issue monetary sanctions against the DT if she wants to with no prejudice to their client.

Don't think that will happen. I guess I want to see some verbal hand slapping from her to the DT. It hasn't happened and there have been oh so many opportunities.

 

[MandyLeigh]

I know darn well I heard Juan say they are trying to get in things that were ruled not allowed. Therefore why is the judge making Juan take time during court to interview this guy? Why can't she take control of her courtroom and rule on something?

This trial is turning into a circus show with the only sane person up there being Martinez and the detective.

And it still sounds to me like she was snapping at the Prosecution. I just watched it again on HLN. She was said this is obviously something that should have been raised if there was a problem but that ship has sailed. The one with the problem is Mr. Martinez. Can someone explain how this is not against him?

 

[Litigatrix]

Me thinks this is the portion that they want in:

Without his conscious knowledge, the sight of the gun had sent a signal to his brain stem, passing a message to his amygdala....his blood vessels constricted so that he would bleed less if he got wounded. His heart rate shot up. A surge of hormones charged through his system, injecting power to his major muscle groups should he need to fight or fight.

As happens for most people in life-or-death situations, his brain began to manipulate his perception of time, slowing down the motion as he fled down the corridor. (not enough to make getting tackled, being chased, shooting someone, stabbing someone and slitting their throat happen in 62 seconds.)

Without being aware of it, Glennon had dropped his gun in the hallway when he’d reached over to help the wounded officer. In moments of extreme stress, the brain does not allow for contemplation; it does not process new information the way it normally does. The more advanced parts of the brain that handle decisionmaking go off-line, unable to intervene until the immediate fear has diminished.

But this is the difference between the guy and the article and Jodi:

More than anything else, Glennon wanted to shoot back. He started to squeeze the trigger. Then from somewhere in the recesses of his brain, he reminded himself: You can’t shoot. If he did, he would risk hitting the third officer standing behind the gunman. His training kicked in just in time, overriding his instincts. (her instincts apparently told her to mutilate).

 

[Donnareit]

WOW, this judge is going WAY overboard because she is not confident enough of herself to know what will and what will NOT be ground for an appeal.
Get with the program, judge, and do what you are suppose to do!!

I know, hard to believe, but that's what she is doing by having JM reexamine the witness to go over the changes in his report. Problem is this is not enough time for JM to prepare his cross if this gets in (and I bet it does). He'll get it on rebuttal, never fear.