trial day 31: the defense continues it's case in chief #87

[SmoothOperator]

sorry for the slight o/t, but just had to ask if everyone's page has the french sexy ad at the top right of their page?.... I've never seen it before and its in all French, smudob.com is the ad and has a woman in just lace panties embracing a nude dude(atleast all visible areas are nude, save her lacy panties).. the pic looks like one from steamy romance novel cover..lol..does everyone have this ad??

 

[StephanieHartPI]

On February 7, 2002, I got home from work to find my 27 year old daughter had died. She had BPD and had been hospitalized 5 times in the last 15 months for overdoses of prescribed medication. The mental health counselors thought it was just fine to give her 3 month supplies of heavy duty meds. I had spent the last 12 years trying to keep her alive long enough for her to realize that her life had not passed her by and that she could still go back and finish college.

Anyhow, for the next year, year and a half, I would relive finding her, rolling her over, feeling how cold she was, her precious kitty was just going crazy. When police and ambulance arrived, I was asked a lot of questions....I know they had to. I worked about 25 minutes away and I would just blank out driving to or from work. When I relived it, I went through all the physical reactions too. Heart pounding, hyperventilating, etc. After two years I finally threw in the towel and got help from a therapist. MY PTSD made me relive the nightmare, not forget it!

This just kills me. This is pain. I'm glad you went to a therapist. I don't know how one gets through something like this....thank you for sharing the story, as I have always said, when we talk to each other here, there are so many life stories to be told...It brings everything in perspective

 

[Karmady]

JM cited some case law iirc maybe 401,402,403. I don't know what those are.

I am also confused.

If you heard those numbers it's most likely the rules of evidence

ARTICLE IV. RELEVANCY AND ITS LIMITS 11

Rule 401. Definition of “relevant evidence.”

Rule 402. Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible

Rule 403. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time

http://civilprocedure.uslegal.com/r...-rules-of-evidence/arizona-rules-of-evidence/

 

[TigerBalm]

JM cited some case law iirc maybe 401,402,403. I don't know what those are.

I am also confused.

Arizona Rules of Evidence

Rule 401. Definition of Relevant Evidence
"Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of
any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable
or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Rule 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible
All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by the
Constitution of the United States, by the Constitution of Arizona or by applicable
statutes or rules. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.

Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is
substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the
issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of
time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

http://www.arizonacrimelaws.com/evid_index.htm

 

[SusieD]

No, he said the payment rate in AZ was much lower than in NJ.

I believe he was talking about insurance reimbursement for private practice, which is why he moved to az to be a shill

 

[Meemaw12]

Assuming the worst, as Stephens has repeatedly done her best impression of a Bavarian pretzel on behalf the defense, what does it mean if it's let in? Can JM fix it/diminish the potential impact?

TIA.

Well I honestly don't know for sure, except what JM said about it early this morning, like it's a back door entry that was ruled could not happen, if that makes sense.

You can't unring a bell that's the bad part.

If Dick explains to the jury the 2 types of homicide, one being crime of passion the bell is rung.

That' the way I see it.

Hope one of our Attorney's can explain it to us. It seems to be really important in this case.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Surprises me that Joey Jackson is saying on HLN that Juan Martinez is possibly too aggressive making jurors
sympathize with Jodi. :sheesh: Are you kidding, Joey? I want him to body slam her!

:nono: You're wrong, Joey Jackson.

For once, JeanC. is doing a great job giving Juan the credit he deserves. I just shudder to think what could
have stayed hidden from the jurors without Juan.

Juan ripped Jodi's mask off, IMO, and she is not human under it. :what:

He's only playing the DT part for this "trial". If you listen to him other times, it's easy to see where heart lies. The only bad thing I see about this, is that anything JJ says is much better than what nurmi can come up with, and I could see him stealing ideas.

 

[Boytwnmom]

jurors to consider, in determining witness credibility

any interest, bias or prejudice the witness may have

. Obviously, losing your practice and being discredited and forced to move across the country and start a new business where you offer to assist defense attorneys in helping their clients get acquitted by use of his expert testimony may tend to show a certain motivation and bias by the expert witness. Now Juan may or may not bring it up but it's completely proper if he does.

Determining the credibility of the witnesses is an incredibly important part of the juror's job and admissable relevant evidence should not be withheld from the jury because it's mean to say it.

This is what the jurors have to do:

You are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses and what weight is to be given the testimony of each witness. In considering the testimony of each witness, you may take into account the opportunity and ability of the witness to observe, the witness’ memory and manner while testifying, any interest, bias or prejudice the witness may have, the reasonableness of the testimony of the witness considered in a light of all the evidence, and any other factors that bear on credibility and weight.

http://federalevidence.com/pdf/JuryInst/Ariz.StanCrimInstru.CumulSupp.pdf

Looking at that you can't help but feel good about Juan's case. What does the defense have? Jodi's testimony and the testimony of Dr. Samuels-I wouldn't want to bet my life on that working.

It was a classic case of conflict of interest. The conflict of interest is a valid argument. It proved he received a benefit for his testimonly in the past.

This is important that the jury would know IMO so they can give whatever weight they want to to his testimony.

 

[Whisperer]

sorry for the slight o/t, but just had to ask if everyone's page has the french sexy ad at the top right of their page?.... I've never seen it before and its in all French, smudob.com is the ad and has a woman in just lace panties embracing a nude dude(atleast all visible areas are nude, save her lacy panties).. the pic looks like one from steamy romance novel cover..lol..does everyone have this ad??

No Smooth, I have a Jeep Ad. You may have got that ad researching Jodie Arias. Let's all hope that is the reason..:floorlaugh:

 

[LambChop]

Exactly my impression. She was looking up the whole time she was foraging in her orange file. That's why I perceived it as "sneaky"...

It's just her stubby little pencil she writes with. You can see her immediately start to write on the paper in front of her. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Anyone else think it may have taken this expert 13 years to get licensed in AZ considering he had charges against him in NJ??????

 

[flipflop53]

I was relistening to yesterday's testimony about taking photos of her neck that JM wasn't allowed to show. Why was she taking pics of her neck on June 3rd 2008, the day before the murder?

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 30 - Part 2 - YouTube starting at about 52:00

 

[raisincharlie]

Here's something to ponder...

If we are to play along with crazy Jodi for one moment and pretend her ludicrous story is true... her response STILL doesn't make sense...

The gun goes off by accident and she's not aware whether she shot him or not, she scrambles to get away in fear for her life and totally blacks out until she is driving in the desert hours later.

According to her story, she has no idea if he's dead or alive and she's very afraid that something bad happened, obviously because there is blood on her and she has weapons. The first thing any human being, especially a battered threatened woman, would do (scared or not) would be to find out if this life threatening man is still alive! DUH!!!

But no... she didn't do that... she immediately went in to cover up mode. The fact that she went in to cover up mode means that SHE KNEW HE WAS DEAD. Which means she knew damn well what she did and what state he was in when she left that house.

Every single path you take with all of her stories leads to a dead end road.

I hope (and do believe) that the jurors will logically play out all of these scenarios to fully know in their hearts that they are making the right decision by voting guilty. As much as we'd all love to hand over that verdict, it's still hard to do. I hope that they have peace in their hearts doing it.

Agree but want to add - she knew he was dead as, if one believes her story about the series of events, after she shot him she would not have ran around looking for a knife when the gun was in the bathroom with a supposedly alive Travis who just threatened to kill her. I don't believe a knife is the weapon to have when facing up to a really mean man who would have or could have had a gun. She's full of it...he was already dead when she shot him and absolutely nothing about her story is true.

 

[TigerBalm]

Surprises me that Joey Jackson is saying on HLN that Juan Martinez is possibly too aggressive making jurors
sympathize with Jodi. :sheesh: Are you kidding, Joey? I want him to body slam her!

:nono: You're wrong, Joey Jackson.

For once, JeanC. is doing a great job giving Juan the credit he deserves. I just shudder to think what could
have stayed hidden from the jurors without Juan.

Juan ripped Jodi's mask off, IMO, and she is not human under it. :what:

Joey is playing the part of the defense attorney on that show.

If you watched last night, he had to give reasons why the defendant wasn't lying about the gun.

 

[Whisperer]

I think this witness was a psych for the state in countering workers compensation claims.That's the impression I get reading between his line of bull.

 

[LotusPawprint]

sorry for the slight o/t, but just had to ask if everyone's page has the french sexy ad at the top right of their page?.... I've never seen it before and its in all French, smudob.com is the ad and has a woman in just lace panties embracing a nude dude(atleast all visible areas are nude, save her lacy panties).. the pic looks like one from steamy romance novel cover..lol..does everyone have this ad??

No that appears to be all you! The ads I have now look customized to me but they are NOT sexy frenchness :blushing:

 

[Curious Me]

In between selling his soul for dental work, he's been sniffing spray starch. Looks about 180 degrees the opposite of "flat affect" in this interview. Guess it comes and goes...

lease: Please tell me nobody really sniffs spray starch.

 

[CourtsInSession]

Here is today's testimony:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adTQKWFG-PI

Thanks for trying to help me PP, but the above video is the first part of the testimony. I saw Nurmi pick up his glass and drink about an hour before court was over. I need to find near the end of today's testimony.

 

[Madeleine74]

The actual content of what the defense witness (Samuels) is testifying to is correct and (mostly) valid, but it has *nothing* to do with JA or this case.

She planned a murder, she hid her activities, and this is before she was traumatized by the horror of her own violence. She executed the murder. So memory lapses and PTSD and any other behavioral issues he talks about are moot. Who cares if she claims she can't remember what she did? She did it and she admits she did it. There are pictures. 29 stab wounds is not self-defense.

Hiding/disposing of weapons, bloody clothes, creating false alibis, and all the other things she did are also not about a person who acted in self-defense. It smacks of pre-planning, then premeditation, and finally, coverup.

PTSD? BFD! and GMAB!

 

[JusticeJunkie]

I was relistening to yesterday's testimony about taking photos of her neck that JM wasn't allowed to show. Why was she taking pics of her neck on June 3rd 2008, the day before the murder?

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 30 - Part 2 - YouTube starting at about 52:00

It's confusing, because she says the "event" happened in April? much earlier. She goes on to say the shots don't show her bruises - lol - because she covered them with makeup.