trial day 31: the defense continues it's case in chief #88

[G&AMom]

BBM. She definitely is. I'm sure she knew exactly how to answer the questions to her benefit. Did he really think she was going to answer questions truthfully? Ha!

This is kind of O/T, but I was talking to a young man who had taken a test for employment at some place like Office Depot. He said one of the questions was whether you'd known anybody that sold drugs. I started laughing and said anybody who's gone of high school in the U.S. since 1970 has known somebody who sold drugs -- doesn't mean you bought any. He agreed but said if you answered "yes" to the question they wouldn't hire you.

What a waste of time. Then I realized that Office Depot (and a million other places) are full of employees who lied on their application. Sigh.

 

[josie1986]

Oh no. Were there two dogs? What happened to Napolean's father? Did Arias starve him too? :furious:

i meant travis, napoleons daddy. i call myself our kittys mummy,weird i dunno :floorlaugh:

 

[popsicle]

The thing that bothered me the most, about this so called expert for the defense, is that this guy's experience and practice is wide and varied. He is not specialized in this particular area at all and I immediately questioned, is this the best they can do? When I seek out a therapist or Dr I look at what their specialty is. jmo

 

[kscornfed]

I don't think they can be prosecuted but they would be disbarred if evidence of that came to light.

i don't understand. defense attorneys defend guilty clients. we know that. THEY know that. attorney/client privilege means nobody ever knows what they really know. and only a fool lies to their own attorney, because the information is 100% safe. it's like being in a confessional. (i'm sure jodi has lied to them about some things, but i believe they know this isn't a case of self defense. it's not like they believe her, but this defense is the best chance they have of getting her off.)

they have to fashion a defense anyway and come up with alternate explanations for the state's evidence. that's the job. and they do it even if they know their client is guilty. nobody gets disbarred for that.

in fact, if nurmi and wilmott managed somehow to get her acquitted, it would be a home run for them, career-wise, just like it was for jose baez.

 

[Nali87]

This is kind of O/T, but I was talking to a young man who had taken a test for employment at some place like Office Depot. He said one of the questions was whether you'd known anybody that sold drugs. I started laughing and said anybody who's gone of high school in the U.S. since 1970 has known somebody who sold drugs -- doesn't mean you bought any. He agreed but said if you answered "yes" to the question they wouldn't hire you.

What a waste of time. Then I realized that Office Depot (and a million other places) are full of employees who lied on their application. Sigh.

Lol such pointless questions. The same goes for job interviews. EVERYONE says they're a hard worker, always on time, etc. :floorlaugh:

 

[josie1986]

Agree. I don't think Nurmi and Willmott believe her story at all. But what are they going to do?

i guess what i meant is,say Jodi confessed to them she murdered him that way the state are saying but they continue with the self defense and lies....could they be disbarred or whatever?

 

[ClosArgs]

He also came to a conclusion that she was passive by reading her journals going back to high school. However he failed to mention that she had pages torn out because Jodi claimed she felt what she wrote was too negative. So did he take that into consideration when he evaluated her. Not everyone is honest when they write in their journals. In particular when you let someone else read them as Jodi admits she let Travis read hers. If you plan for someone to read your journals at some point in your life what are the chances you are going to write, "Some days I feel like an axe murderer." How about slim to none?????? jmo

Thanks LambChop, I only watched about 40 minutes of yesterdays testimony of Samuels. I thought I heard him say from reading her journal she was a passivist.

Yet when I was reading the posts from yesterday I kept reading he called her a pacifist, and couldn't for the life of me figure out why he would be testifying about a voluntary belief as opposed to a psychological behavior.

Did he say anything about dependent personality disorder in his testimony or was it all pstd?

Did he address the actual murder yesterday or "Event" as he was referring to it in his first half hour yesterday?

 

[Sigh Sister]

What do you think she was conjuring and don't you think that this is clearly showing that JA was blackmailing TA? Was she baiting him with the framed and taped phone sex session?

TA's text message to JA>

<<I don`t ever want to get another freaking text from you again or a call unless it`s an apology and a thank you for constantly having to take on your ever-ceasing problems. Not one freaking more.

I`m sick of your soap opera and your ways. You purposely try to ruin every day. It seems you`re getting good at it. You couldn`t get off your lazy butt, because that`s the sociopath I know so well, it freaking figures.

I want you to understand how evil I think you are. You are the worst thing that ever happened to me. It made me feel not good, I guess. It made me feel yucky.
You are a sociopath. You only cry for yourself. You have never cared about me and you have betrayed me worse than any example I could conjure. You are sick and you have scammed me.
=====

Do not call back,. I’m sick of you playing stupid and dealing with your childish issues. Bitter feelings are brewing in me for you, and if it keeps up I fear I will have a genuine dislike for you before I have a revenge.

You don't care about anything that doesn't involve you, and I'm sick of it, and I don't want to deal with any of it. It's wearing me out and if it continues, just like I have to give you motivation to tell me the truth I'll give you motivation to quit screwing with me.
======

After tomorrow it's going to be really bad for you. It's time to spit it out.
=====

I promise you the punishment will be better than the lie. >>
=====

BBM

I have never seen the portion that I bolded. It's really odd and doesn't seem to flow with what he is saying.:waitasec:

 

[Schuby]

I have taken one of those tests. My dog could pass one of those tests.

 

[Nali87]

i don't understand. defense attorneys defend guilty clients. we know that. THEY know that. attorney/client privilege means nobody ever knows what they really know. and only a fool lies to their own attorney, because the information is 100% safe. it's like being in a confessional. (i'm sure jodi has lied to them about some things, but i believe they know this isn't a case of self defense. it's not like they believe her, but this defense is the best chance they have of getting her off.)

they have to fashion a defense anyway and come up with alternate explanations for the state's evidence. that's the job. and they do it even if they know their client is guilty. nobody gets disbarred for that.

in fact, if nurmi and wilmott managed somehow to get her acquitted, it would be a home run for them, career-wise, just like it was for jose baez.

Yes but an attorney can't allow a defendant to testify knowing (not suspecting, but for example told by the defendant) that he/she is lying. I know that's a crime.

Not saying some don't do it... But I think most just pretend to be dummies with their clients. Unless the story is completely unbelievable!! :floorlaugh:

 

[Schuby]

i don't understand. defense attorneys defend guilty clients. we know that. THEY know that. attorney/client privilege means nobody ever knows what they really know. and only a fool lies to their own attorney, because the information is 100% safe. it's like being in a confessional. (i'm sure jodi has lied to them about some things, but i believe they know this isn't a case of self defense. it's not like they believe her, but this defense is the best chance they have of getting her off.)

they have to fashion a defense anyway and come up with alternate explanations for the state's evidence. that's the job. and they do it even if they know their client is guilty. nobody gets disbarred for that.

in fact, if nurmi and wilmott managed somehow to get her acquitted, it would be a home run for them, career-wise, just like it was for jose baez.

No, attorney client privilege is not absolute. For example, if she were to tell them where the gun was hidden, they would have an ethical duty to hand over that information. Not doing so would lead to a state bar investigation, sanctions, and possibly disbarment.

 

[Kajaa24]

Judge Karen Mills on Dr Drew was wonderful. She tore apart the defense team.

YES!
she was 'on the roll' - lol
loved it and her...she truly did not hold back

 

[Angelina Frost]

BBM

I have never seen the portion that I bolded. It's really odd and doesn't seem to flow with what he is saying.:waitasec:

The murderer said that, not TA. It was her response when Nurmi asked for the 1000000000000th time how she felt about it.

 

[G&AMom]

i guess what i meant is,say Jodi confessed to them she murdered him that way the state are saying but they continue with the self defense and lies....could they be disbarred or whatever?

No one would ever hear about a confession to the defense lawyers because it's attorney-client privilege. The attorneys can't be forced to say they heard such a confession.

I think the attorneys could be disbarred only if there was evidence that the attorneys actively encouraged her to lie -- helping her phony up documents, paying a witness to lie, or something like that. I think it would be incredibly difficult to prove. I don't think I've ever heard of a case where a lawyer was charged with helping a client to lie.

 

[UKgirl]

Really? It's definitely there. Anyone else see it?? It's running from his earlobe down the side of his neck. It's a single stream of darker fluid.

To me in one picture it just looks like the shadow of the water dripping from his ear. What I cant understand is why the flash is off in alot of these.

 

[Schuby]

i don't understand. defense attorneys defend guilty clients. we know that. THEY know that. attorney/client privilege means nobody ever knows what they really know. and only a fool lies to their own attorney, because the information is 100% safe. it's like being in a confessional. (i'm sure jodi has lied to them about some things, but i believe they know this isn't a case of self defense. it's not like they believe her, but this defense is the best chance they have of getting her off.)

they have to fashion a defense anyway and come up with alternate explanations for the state's evidence. that's the job. and they do it even if they know their client is guilty. nobody gets disbarred for that.

in fact, if nurmi and wilmott managed somehow to get her acquitted, it would be a home run for them, career-wise, just like it was for jose baez.

Also, they CANNOT suborn perjury. So if she told them she killed him unprovoked, they cannot allow her to take the stand and testify to being attacked.

 

[Linda From New York]

So I woke up yesterday to the "Blue Screen of Death" anic:.

Had to get a new computer, came home while the geek squad at Best Buy transferred my hard drive.

I was watching on HLN, which is a lesson in patience, with all the freaking commercials, and I was yelling at the TV several times and I had no computer so I had NO Websleuths to vent with .

The only two words on my lips in the during and in the end were:

JUNK PSYCHOLOGY !!!:floorlaugh:

 

[Nali87]

i guess what i meant is,say Jodi confessed to them she murdered him that way the state are saying but they continue with the self defense and lies....could they be disbarred or whatever?

In American law and in Scots law the subornation of perjury is the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury &#8212; the swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, be it spoken or written. The term subornation of perjury further describes the circumstance wherein an attorney at law causes a client to lie, or allows another party to lie, under oath.[1][2]

In American federal law, Title 18 U.S.C. § 1622 provides that:
Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

In California law, [3] subornation of perjury constitutes an act of "moral turpitude" (per the State Bar Court) and thus is cause for disbarment or suspension. [4]

In legal practice, the condition of suborning perjury applies to a lawyer who presents either testimony or an affidavit, or both, either to a judge or to a jury, which the attorney knows to be materially false, and not factual. In civil law and in criminal law, the attorney&#8217;s knowledge that the testimony is materially false must rise above mere suspicion to what an attorney would reasonably have believed in the circumstances of the matter discussed in the testimony. Hence, the attorney cannot be wilfully blind to the fact that his or her witness is giving false, perjurious testimony.

more:
Subornation of perjury - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Venom]

What do you think she was conjuring and don't you think that this is clearly showing that JA was blackmailing TA? Was she baiting him with the framed and taped phone sex session?

TA's text message to JA>

<<I don`t ever want to get another freaking text from you again or a call unless it`s an apology and a thank you for constantly having to take on your ever-ceasing problems. Not one freaking more.

I`m sick of your soap opera and your ways. You purposely try to ruin every day. It seems you`re getting good at it. You couldn`t get off your lazy butt, because that`s the sociopath I know so well, it freaking figures.

I want you to understand how evil I think you are. You are the worst thing that ever happened to me. It made me feel not good, I guess. It made me feel yucky.

You are a sociopath. You only cry for yourself. You have never cared about me and you have betrayed me worse than any example I could conjure. You are sick and you have scammed me.
=====

Do not call back,. I’m sick of you playing stupid and dealing with your childish issues. Bitter feelings are brewing in me for you, and if it keeps up I fear I will have a genuine dislike for you before I have a revenge.

You don't care about anything that doesn't involve you, and I'm sick of it, and I don't want to deal with any of it. It's wearing me out and if it continues, just like I have to give you motivation to tell me the truth I'll give you motivation to quit screwing with me.
======

After tomorrow it's going to be really bad for you. It's time to spit it out.
=====

I promise you the punishment will be better than the lie. >>
=====

Maybe this part:
You have never cared about me and you have betrayed me worse than any example I could conjure. You are sick and you have scammed me.
Could be that he found out about her taping the phone sex against his knowledge?

 

[StephanieHartPI]

I've always been conflicted about the Death Penalty. If I was on a Jury and they were charged as such, that the Death Penalty was on the table, I could do it.

The alternative is they have a full life in prison, and for people that think that's worse, I don't think it is, they adapt fairly well, especially women. They are alive, their families can call and visit. They are "alive".

As horrendous as that day must be when you know you will be put to death, it's maybe only that bad for you and me, the type that wouldn't murder innocent people. It's a wonder to me, the thought of getting put to death does not phase some. They think they can get away with it, or they're just nuts.

She really had a choice. She planned this for 2 weeks at least, you know if the actual plan was being mapped out, it was a thought of hers for longer than that. She had so many opportunities to change her mind and calm down and not kill him.

She caused this...