trial day 32: the defense continues it's case in chief #91

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think Juan would have even needed to bring that up to discredit and impeach this fellow. (Time Magazine, TGA/not TGA, crude diagrams.) He seems to be doing just fine all by himself! :twocents:

Exactly
 
Ok let's say she doesn't remember stabbing him? she admits killing him? so what's the problem? Killing smilling right she said she did kill the poor guy..he was defenseless..
 
Her appearance has deteriorated significantly during this trial. Or maybe it's my perception of her that has changed into viewing her as a grossly unattractive individual.

She's 32 yrs old I think. She's about as far way from her 25th b-day and she is close to her 40th. If that makes sense. She looks haggard.
 
Can you imagine how the "bartering" session went. Probably like this...

Client: "I dont have any money to pay you"

Physch Dr." Well what do you have?"

Client: " I am a dentist and can give you free dental care"

Physch Dr. "Really, wow. My bottom right molar has been bugging me. That will be great. When can I get it taken care of?" "Anything else you got that I can swindle from you?"

The way you've misspelled that, it would be pronounced like "Fish Doctor" instead of PSYCH DR. ;)

ETA: ... though I will admit he does seem "fishy"
 
This 'expert' seems a little overly defensive imo, which makes me question if it's something he's developed over time because of problems in his history. And JA, just look at her expression during his testimony, she's changed her persona yet again to this non-blinking, stare into space, and "see how wounded I am" poor thing...:what: Though this 'doctor' hasn't convinced me of a thing to do with her, he sure seems to have her convinced, lol.

Oh, also that point he made about her being "covered in blood", is he not aware that there was no blood found leaving Travis' rooms? Also, there was no blood found in the car either IIRC. So how could she have been covered in blood ?
Oh, that's right, that's what she told him, :lol:.

It's really sad what some so called professionals will do for money. jmo

I read that he has been called on this many times in other courtrooms where he has testified. He probably made up this story and has told it many times now.

IMO
 
Beth just said that good doc FORGOT to add that he was ordered to take and ethics class. I was reading the judge's bio last night, and she was on an ethics board for a number of years.
 
pig-lipstick.jpg

oh she wishes she looked this good!


TOO BAD< IT WAS PERFECT!
 
I was one of the ones that never found her that attractive....certainly not beautiful as she has been described by NG and JVM. She was okay cute at first but even then her right eye was a total distraction for me.

Now that I have seen her for so long I find her downright homely. Her nose is very large and her bottom lip looks like she is dipping dry snuff. Im not kidding....that is what it looks like to me.

I didn't like her as a blonde either. She was very pale with blonde hair.

IMO

For me she is one of those people whom when you first meet you think " wow she is a cute girl " now as I have had to listen to her she is very unattractive to me, it's almost as if I am now seeing an entire different person.
IMO the juror sees it the same, the first time she entered the court room I believe they probaly thought wow a beautiful young woman how did she get herself into this. Now they probaly look at her and think oh great this nasty thing again sigh JMO
 
The extraordinary poor coverage of the JA trial by HLN never ceases to amaze me.
Here we have a questionable expert, Samuels, speaking to the issue of “memory”. Memory is the proper purview of a neuroscientist – such as a physiologist or a neurologist.
So what does HLN present? Attorneys weighing in as “experts” on memory. The guest attorney provides us commentary based an authoritative anecdote about memory loss from rodeo bull riding!!! Beth Karas as a memory commentator???

Give me a break.

The subject obviously is "memory" . . . . so get an expert on MEMORY rather than jawing endlessly on "memory" by people who have no clue about this topic.
 
Interesting observation because Dr Drew's panel of men said that as the trial has elapsed and more creepy things about her come out, she loses her appeal to any men who once found her attractive.

Maybe that is a general phenom with all people who view her

Hugh Heffner would prolly hire her!
 
Beth Karas &#8207;@BethKaras
Jurors are already submitting questions today for Samuels. They submitted a number of questions last Thursday also.
 
OK since we are again luxuriating in an exceptionally long lunch break after a tediously short period of testimony... Did anyone else watching azcentral notice JA doing a weird "counting" thing on the edge of her table with her left hand? It was during a sidebar, she went first-finger, second-finger (just enough to bring her cramped ring finger into view), then she made a fist and jammed it under her chin. Was I alone in catching that?
 
I'd like Juan to ask him about the song Jodi was singing before she was arrested, and let the jury see the one that has the woman hiding in the closet peeking out, then ask him if he wants to stand by what Jodi told him?

Dr. Richard Samuels, otherwise know as screwed. I see a meeting with the medical board soon.
 
Dr Samuels:

"In an administrative action filed with the New Jersey Board of Psychological Examiners, Dr. Richard Samuels, currently of Scottsdale AZ, was fined $2500.00 in 2000 due to a conflict of interest for his involvement in a child custody lawsuit.

Samuels bartered dental services from the father in exchange for "psychotherapeutic services". The doctor proceeded to testify in behalf of the father without even interviewing the child's mother. The Board also ordered Samuels to complete continuing education courses on ethics and boundaries issues.

According to Dr. Samuels listings, he was licensed in NJ in 1975, (#S 101060), and in the state of Arizona in 1989, (#3043). He is practicing as a Clinical and Forensic Psychologist out of Scottsdale, AZ. "
 
I was one of the ones that never found her that attractive....certainly not beautiful as she has been described by NG and JVM. She was okay cute at first but even then her right eye was a total distraction for me.

Now that I have seen her for so long I find her downright homely. Her nose is very large and her bottom lip looks like she is dipping dry snuff. Im not kidding....that is what it looks like to me.

I didn't like her as a blonde either. She was very pale with blonde hair.

IMO

What about her right eye?

Not sure if I want to know because that will be all I notice....but yeah...what about her right eye?
 
For me she is one of those people whom when you first meet you think " wow she is a cute girl " now as I have had to listen to her she is very unattractive to me, it's almost as if I am now seeing an entire different person.
IMO the juror sees it the same, the first time she entered the court room I believe they probaly thought wow a beautiful young woman how did she get herself into this. Now they probaly look at her and think oh great this nasty thing again sigh JMO

I agree! I also think that when she first took the stand they were willing to listen to her story and give the benefit of the doubt. But the more she talked the more disgusted with her they became. The more lies she told, the further away they drew from her. Now they cannot even look at her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
120
Guests online
2,791
Total visitors
2,911

Forum statistics

Threads
601,211
Messages
18,120,724
Members
230,996
Latest member
MiaCarmela
Back
Top