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

[4Jacy]

It will seem odd at first but there will be plenty of people still discussing the case. So don't worry about withdrawal. By the time you think you can move away....there will be something that catches your eye...and then there you go again.

..Unfortunately, there is no shortage of heinous crimes and missing people. Many of us have been through quite a few cases together.

Exactly Whisp! Andrea Sneiderman and the one that is so heartfelt to me: Trayvon Martin (God bless him and his parents<3.

 

[basilcat]

Justice Junkie,
My psychiatrist told me that I shouldn't follow true crime murder trials - ever..
Obviously, I do not heed her advice...
Maybe I shouldn't...
But, I think, here on websleuths, I find others who care as much as me about victims and justice and consequences, that it reassures me/redeems humanity somewhat so that going forward is a tad bit easier..
To answer your question.... Following this trial has been difficult in many ways ( it has been 5 years since Jenny has been gone-so the time frame and ferocity of murder is similar)....but in many ways, reading everyone's posts and accepting some humour (even though this sounds crazy given the circumstances) seems to help me in some way.....
Thank you so much for caring ....
And Justice for Travis...

 

[Curious Me]

De-Jodify process is being activated now. Signing off with sincere Thank Yous to Websleuthers for never tiring to seek truth and justice, and share a hug. :wave:


.........................fftobed:

 

[ElleElle]

This Dr Samuels claims "intercourse causes amnesia" .... :laughcry:

 

[RadarLuv]

The good Dr. says the DSM 5 is out in 8 months they say. I wonder if they DT will draw this trial out just in case "cray-cray" will be in there as a new mental disorder. Jodi might stand a chance then.

 

[muddymcduck]

This Dr Samuels claims "intercourse causes amnesia" .... :laughcry:

To be fair, I think we've all had 'those nights' we'd rather forget...:blushing:

 

[STEADFAST]

This Dr Samuels claims "intercourse causes amnesia" .... :laughcry:

If only!

 

[marciec]

I would so love this to be a juror question: Dr. Samuels, you stated you never record interviews with your 'clients' as most have a deep "reluctance" to be recorded. The defendant Ms. Arias however, has presented indisputable evidence of her enthusiastic willingness to be audio recorded, without regard to any potential consequences. Did you at any point actually ask her if she preferred to be recorded? Did you ask if you could film her? Would you ask her now? LOL...what a joke..

 

[AngelWings444]

Everyone here at WS is an expert in the field! And by "the field" I mean whatever field you've always wanted to be a part of! Just copy and paste several of your posts into a Word Doc and CONGRATULATIONS! You're professional!

I can't believe I wasted so many years and all that money going to college when I could just spit out crappy drivel and qualify myself as an expert. :doh:

You could have received free dental work too in a custody case..without ever interviewing the other party. Unimaginable the pain he caused the Mom and the child/children. Sickening.

 

[muddymcduck]

Perhaps I should have bunged this in the legal thread, but the following question nagged at me throughout my catchup session with today's testimony:

If Jodi had received this 'diagnosis' of PTSD from Samuels, would she have been allowed to refer to it on the stand when, for example, Martinez asked her if she had 'problems' or 'issues' with her memory? I seem to recall her on several occasions suggesting she didn't feel she had any such problems or issues. Is she technically not allowed to cite Samuels' findings while testifying?

Thanks to anyone with some insight!

 

[thefragile7393]

To be fair, I think we've all had 'those nights' we'd rather forget...:blushing:

:goodpost:kay::waiting:

 

[bsk]

................................................................................................................................................
I think there are a couple of things going on here. First, she HAS NO "personality " of her own. She is a socio/psychopath, void of feelings, emotions and real reactions. Her frame of reference is only from those with whom she interacts in prison (and she has been there for 5 years).

Her female defense attorney, with whom she spends a lot of time is very easy for her to mimic. She is bright enough to realize that this "professional" person is someone she can try and measure up to. As well, she and Samuels have spent many hours together, and she can gather a lot of psycho babble in this way, and KNOW what defense mechanisms/ behaviors (excuses) he will try to define in her, ahead of time. She has had a good long time to practice and learn all of this gobldygook in her brain. MOO

The best way I heard this put was by some talking head defense atty on (I think) Dr Drew. He said something along the lines of: "Jodi has learned to look/act like a human being without actually being one."

 

[manzana]

This Dr Samuels claims "intercourse causes amnesia" .... :laughcry:

No wonder why I have been forgetting things lately, including being married!

 

[thefragile7393]

Perhaps I should have bunged this in the legal thread,

Bunged?

 

[tinkabella]

I've been wondering the same thing and came to the conclusion that she already had marks on her neck on June 3rd and that she took photos of them that for some reason were "not allowed". I guess they weren't allowed "in" and we'll find out about them after trial?

moo

As usual the Judge decided to bend over backwards for the defense. But I felt it should be allowed in because it further proves that JOdi had a plan A B C and D ready to go if she was suspected in Travis' death. The whole time she is supposedly being "abused" by Travis she doesn't take not one pictures of any injury. This is a woman who takes pics of her snatch and everything else in the world (finger injury at work) but NOT ONE pic of anything related to abuse. And then we have her on June 3rd 2008 taking pics of bruises on her neck while driving to murder Travis. IIRC she hadn't seen travis since she moved back to her shack in Yreka so there is NO WAY that Travis put those "bruises" on her neck. Most likely she got them from DB or MM after stopping by their homes for more than just gas cans and small talk. I think the picture should've been allowed because it further proves that she was trying to set up a scenario of her being a victim of abuse. Even if the jury didn't see the pic the bell was rung and someone will remember it.

 

[KandyKane]

Of course I'm way behind and it's impossible to catch up. Can JM admit this into evidence?

Sure. He likely has done so a long time ago. It goes directly to Samuel's credibility, and an expert witness's credibility is what makes them an expert. It's the jury that has to decide if any expert is credible, so any information that supports or refutes it is definitely something they need to know about. An expert witness who is a doctor that was proven to act unethically is something that the jury absolutely needs to know in determining the doctor's credibility as an expert and whether or not they feel they can rely on their testimony.

Honestly, I can't imagine why on earth they put this guy on the stand. If anything it seriously hurts their client. Not only would finding out this guy has an unethical past AS A DOCTOR will not only discount his testimony but also seriously piss off the jury toward the defense that they tried to pull the wool over the jury's eyes with this guy.

 

[LotusPawprint]

I'm going to incorporate the word of the day as much as possible over the weekend in this context:

"You're just using me for my hippocampus!"



Goodnight friends! :seeya:

 

[RadarLuv]

Holly Carp. Did you see Mike reenact the crime on HLN? Does anyone have that video? It's pretty accurate and at a frantic pace. First time I have seen this done.

 

[MrW]

This Dr Samuels claims "intercourse causes amnesia" .... :laughcry:

I need to keep this news away from Mrs W!!! She claims my memory isn't what it used to be... I don't need to give her another excuse.... :floorlaugh:

 

[muddymcduck]

Perhaps I should have bunged this in the legal thread, but the following question nagged at me throughout my catchup session with today's testimony:

Bunged?

Haha, I suppose it's a bit of my British blood showing here.

It just means to toss something, throw something, etc. For example, just bung it in the oven for 10 minutes!

:seeya: