trial day 33: the defense continues its case in chief #96

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did anyone notice that Willmot began to get a bit snarky with her expert witness late this afternoon? I bet the jury noticed too.

Asking about the gun she said " What did she tell you about the gun?"

He said " which time?"

Her sharp reply " She only had the gun one time."

The question could have been interpreted both ways. It appears his response could have referred to which time did JA tell me, rather than which time JA had the gun. Score one point for Samuels on that one.

MOO
 
I don't now- I just know this morning someone posted that Flores was interested in her activities related to her folder activities- and it just dawned on me- geez is all that related-idk??

I have seen 3 videos so far where JA looks like she is up to something. What I don't know. If she is, I hope someone finds out what.
 
I don't know... I liked JW's question-phrasing breakdown myself!:great:


I know! Did you ever see two "professionals" so ill prepared for a major trial? It was reminiscent of another trial, and THAT DT's "experts". I hear circus music in the background as I'm watching them on NG right now. :giggle:

Whoever said parts of this trial are like a SNL skit is so right. You JUST can't make this stuff up. :floorlaugh:
 
Did anyone notice that Willmot began to get a bit snarky with her expert witness late this afternoon? I bet the jury noticed too.

Asking about the gun she said " What did she tell you about the gun?"

He said " which time?"

Her sharp reply " She only had the gun one time."

I noticed that too, in one instance, she cut him off, didn't let him finish talking. lol
 
Nice to see you also!

Still watching HLN. Was any progress made on re-direct or is this just for amusement??!! From what I've watched thus far, it appears Juan Martinez still had the upper hand on this witness.

:D

From the tweets sent out of the courtroom, it seems the jurors had stopped paying attention by then. There was little to no notes being taken, and they described some of the jurors as having their heads down, and looking weary.
 
NO. There is no way she is sneaking anything into Sherriff Joe's jail. No way.


I find it rather amusing that so many peeps think she is getting away with something. :giggle:

Agreed. I would bet there's not a snowball's chance in he dub hockey sticks that she could pull that one off. Maybe on a tv show, but not in real life. :twocents:
 
There is something called Bibliotherapy when a therapist will recommend a book to you or will loan it to you. I'm an avid reader & I have a Master's in Library Science so I love doing research & reading. I've had therapists recommend certain books, and frequently they have a library in their office.

BUT...Samuels was out of line sending her a book/ordering it from Amazon or whatever he did. He was not her therapist, he is supposed to be unbiased--when you're in therapy it's OK for your therapist to like you! NOT when being forensically analyzed. He's a quack & professional courtroom ho.

Well, I'd assume in bibliotherapy, it is discussed between the therapist and the person receiving the therapy... This dude took it upon himself to send her a random book. He said he "obtained her address at the jail," but not that SHE gave it to him. IMO, that makes it even worse since he was NOT her therapist.
 
Did anyone notice that Willmot began to get a bit snarky with her expert witness late this afternoon? I bet the jury noticed too.

Asking about the gun she said " What did she tell you about the gun?"

He said " which time?"

Her sharp reply " She only had the gun one time."

Yeah, I know I'm in the minority but man I feel bad for Nurmi and Willmott. What a debacle to be thrown into, and just when they thought it couldn't get worse, along comes this dimwitted imbecile, who they thought to be an expert, to further embarrass their professional names. That's got to be rough.
 
Dr: "She ran through the closet and that was when the gun was held up." OOPSIE.

Willmot [:panic:] "And Do you remember her telling you that she exited the closet door?"

Dr: Ummm yes..through to an adjoining closet or the hallway, bedroom or something I believe...:clown:
 
From the tweets sent out of the courtroom, it seems the jurors had stopped paying attention by then. There was little to no notes being taken, and they described some of the jurors as having their heads down, and looking weary.

Thanks! So far I'm bored, and I only have spent about an hour listening. Can't imagine the torture for those Jurors.

:what:
 
I hope we get through ALL the juror questions tomorrow, so the DT (which is who they'll be slanted towards) doesn't have time over the break to think up answers.

Yeah, except no court on Thurs/Fri dark. So if the questions take up all day, they'll have 4 days to think up answers. :seeya:
 
One thing I do wish JM would have asked Doc Samuels is about the anxiety number - really, being in jail has to be stressing I would think. Why blame PTSD when confinement and facing a DP case seems to be more responsible for ruining her life (in conjunction with her being a murderer), household cleaning chores and the rest of that list from the test.

Some really dumb open ended questions on that test.
 
I question how much impact she'll really have when she's queried on behaviors exhibited by Jodi extremely consistent with an abusive personality. When she's questioned about very common markers in abusers totally missing from Travis' personality. And when she's pushed to the wall over how to explain her seeming willingness to totally dismiss abusive behaviors on the part of the defendant. It is a lot for the jury to get past in order for her to have an impact. And while the entire list may not make it into evidence, this jury has already called Jodi out on controlling behaviors, the hallmark of abusers.

Behaviors consistent with an abusive personality...

Jodi:
Moved to Mesa after their relationship ended - pursuit in a very classical sense.
Slashed the tires on his car - damage to personal property.
Sent a 'warning' email to a prospective girlfriend.
Snooped through his text messages.
Stalked him repeatedly.
In my opinion, very likely cyber stalked him.
Consistently violated boundaries of personal privacy.
Snooped through his online accounts.
Knew his ATM pin # and garage access code.
Dismissed his voiced concerns over them having sex.
Showed evidence of high manipulation through their phone recording.
Isolated Travis in the not so classical sense that because of their sex life, Travis would have been unable to confide the reality of their relationship to many.
Threatened suicide as emotional blackmail.

Behaviors inconsistent with an abusive personality:
Encouraging Jodi to date other people.
Not escalating the relationship to a more serious nature very, very quickly.
No evidence of stalking or harassing Jodi once she moved back to Yreka.
No escalation of violence according to testimony on direct.
No isolation of Jodi - this doesn't mean keeping her from 'his' friends - it means systematically shutting down her every 'outside' resource, sometimes to even include work and family.
No evidence of financial abuse - instead he was lending her money.
Nothing to prove incessant emails, non-stop text messages, or constant phone calls on Travis' part.
No outward evidence of jealousy on Travis' end. Not rising to the level I would expect from an abuser, anyway.
No testimony from friends or family, in court or elsewhere, to indicate an easily triggered temper, impatience, possessiveness, etc.
No proof he circumvented her movements - she didn't live with him and he even lent her his car.
Didn't fly into a rage over a ruined BMW.
Seemingly actively tried to help Jodi on many fronts.

ITA, I just think JM has to be careful with this one. She's likely to be very combative, given her background. I'm guessing she's had quite a bit of experience holding her own.

Although, I freely admit I'm already biased against her for taking this case, which is without merit. She does a huge disservice to the true victims she professes to help.
 
I haven't mentioned it much, however, it has been my belief her head was covered, either with a hoodie or baseball cap, perhaps. Sweater, I don't think so. Maybe more like an athletic-type zip up jacket to go with the pants she had on?

:waitasec:

Average temp in June in Mesa is over 100 degrees. Wearing a hoodie, sweater, anything like that, might draw attention. I don't see her doing that.
 
NO. There is no way she is sneaking anything into Sherriff Joe's jail. No way.


I find it rather amusing that so many peeps think she is getting away with something. :giggle:

I saw on Lock Up or Hard Time (can't remember which) some inmates snuck in cigarettes into tent city.

Last week was the lady who had put a loaded handgun in her V.
 
There is something called Bibliotherapy when a therapist will recommend a book to you or will loan it to you. I'm an avid reader & I have a Master's in Library Science so I love doing research & reading. I've had therapists recommend certain books, and frequently they have a library in their office.

BUT...Samuels was out of line sending her a book/ordering it from Amazon or whatever he did. He was not her therapist, he is supposed to be unbiased--when you're in therapy it's OK for your therapist to like you! NOT when being forensically analyzed. He's a quack & professional courtroom ho.
He crossed the boundary line when he sent Jodi greeting cards in prison because he felt sorry for her. A female social worker in my county recently lost her state license because she encouraged some of her female patients to attend Arthur Murray dance lessons which she also attended (not confidential knowledge). Befriending patients indicates there is no longer a therapist and client relationship.
 
Nice to see you also!

Still watching HLN. Was any progress made on re-direct or is this just for amusement??!! From what I've watched thus far, it appears Juan Martinez still had the upper hand on this witness.

:D

I haven't watched much other than NG. I'm betting some of the TH's have spun it that the DT had a "good" day today. I don't think so though. I didn't see anything Wilmott did that would retrieve this witness' credibility (and I think she's losing a bit of that too, with her immature snotty attitude). I'm hoping the jury has kind of tuned him out and disregarded him by now.

The Titanic continues to sink doesn't it? :great:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
3,114
Total visitors
3,249

Forum statistics

Threads
603,266
Messages
18,154,212
Members
231,691
Latest member
CindyW1974
Back
Top