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

[scorpio24]

No. She would probably like that, seeing as how she was obsessed with everything Travis. From what his friends have said, she was pretty fond of that closet, even hiding in it waiting for him to come home from dates with other women.

Oh, yeah. I forgot. Must be my Transient Global Amnesia kicking in. I took a really hot bath this morning. :facepalm:

 

[LambChop]

Even her coming up with the pedophile story was because she alreadt knew that would be one of the worst things you could accuse anyone of and it would look bad for Travis's reputation.
I think if you could look inside her head it would look like a bowl full of maggots.
I think that is also why the defence team asked her to wear glasses to court so it would be harder for the jury to see her souless eyes.

She did not just want to kill Travis. She wanted to get back at all those friends who told him to get rid of her. This is one way she could do that which did not involve her personally where they would say it was HER fault. She really is the lowest of the low. Thankfully it never worked on his friends so she basically failed. She failed killing him and it appears she has failed to dishonor his memory.

Didn't you just love it when JM kept asking about Jodi lying about the breast pictures and Samuels could not get past the fact that it was not illegal and not that she was lying to him. He feels the fact that she lies is not significant. Wow. So if he knows she is a liar there is no way she could have lied on the test. He is such a swell person he just knows she would not do that to him....stab him maybe, lie to him....of course not. It's as plain as day. He just can't understand why we can't all see it. I think he is genuine about that and will be until the fog lifts.

And if Jodi were released because of his testimony and she killed again, his comment to the media would be....."Well, I guess I should have retested her when I knew for sure she was lying." jmo

 

[Southern_Meadow]

Unless Juan can work a miracle in rebuttal, Jodi has a very good chance of being acquitted of all charges!

<modsnip>

You have been beyond negative where JM is concerned throughout this entire trial. It seems you think he is incompetent. It boggles my mind. Need I remind you he has already put one woman on death row and from what I understand there was less evidence in that case than this one. He also got a murder 1 conviction for the man who claimed he was sleepwalking when he killed his wife. You'd be hard pressed to have found anyone who thought that was going to happen. Most thought he would be convicted of manslaughter. Guess where he is today... Juan knows what he is doing. <modsnip>There is zero chance that she will be acquitted of all charges. If anything, murder 1 will be reduced to a lesser charge.

 

[katiedid2]

Thank you!
To whomever made the comment
Jodie's cell is bigger than travis coffin

 

[Ammonitida]

I don't think Juan buried anything. I think where we will see it come together is on cross. I do not think Juan said the belief is Travis was stabbed in the shower and if he were there would not be splatter within the shower because Jodi admits she washed everything down in the shower while Travis body was in there. No one knows what really happened because Jodi has lied so much. Juan does not have to prove what came first only that there was premeditation. Getting the knife is premeditation. Stabbing him nine times in the back is premeditation, cutting his throat is premeditation because she could have stopped at any time. She had two exits, it's not as if there was no exit for her, she had a choice of two. There is no blood whatsoever in the closet and yet she claims (according to Samuels' notes she was covered with blood when she came to her senses driving through the desert). How could that be when she had to get through the bedroom, down the carpeted stairs and out the door without a sign of blood anywhere?

Give the jury credit for being able to process this information in an intelligent, objective fashion. Their questions prove they are paying attention. They are clearly committed to this trial. jmo

Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

 

[Boodles]

I think Samuels administers a test of some sort, transcribes their answers from his yellow notepad paper onto the actual scoring sheets, scores them by hand and provides his expert findings to both sides and the judge. After that, the side which laughs the loudest AND longest gets to pick first. Alternates between sides until it comes down to the final spot on the jury.

The mitigation specialist is called in to unbutton her blouse starting from the top - last person to remain calm with no facial expressions or movements at all wins the final spot.

At least, that's how I think they should do it.

Really, seriously, what was up with that? Why was a standard testing procedure not followed, where the person reads the questions and marks the official answer sheet herself?? How "off" is that? And he hand scored the PTS test...is that standard?

Everything in this case is "an exception." Nothing follows normal logic and reasoning. She travels with full gas cans, she lost her phone charger during the part of the road trip during which she travels to the victim's house, but conveniently finds it and gets a signal when on her "original travel route," she returned an item to the store with perhaps the most sophisticated inventory/supply chain in the world, they gave her cash but have no record of such a transaction, she doesn't have any credit card purchases or receipts for a 12 hour on-the-road period, she lost her entire memory for a convenient ~4 hour period during which she killed a man, her license plate was upside down due to a "skater prank", she buys more gas than would fit in her car plus her "acknowledged" travel gas cans, she conveniently came out of an amnesia state before a police checkpoint at the Hoover Dam, she runs into a closet where she could be trapped instead of a doorway leading to escape, there just happens to be a gun in the closet, it just happens to be loaded, it just happens to go off, there just happens to be a knife handy for 29, she takes standardized tests using non-standardized methods and just happens to be diagnosed with PTSD without even scoring at the threshold level...

The gall of this defendant to pose such a ridiculous set of circumstances to the Court!

Sorry for rambling, I just needed to vent.

/rant

 

[EGirl]

<snipped>

Juan and his experts have presented an illogical theory of the crime. Chiefly, that a stabbing came first in the shower. There's almost no blood splatter in the shower to support the assertion that a flurry of stabs took place there <snipped>

You need to explain the large amount of blood on the sink and mirror. She stabbed him in the chest, he stumbled to the sink, coughing up blood. He tried to flee down the hall while she stabs him in the back.

He falls, she slits his throat. She drags him back to the shower, shoots him in the head and showers off his body.

JMO

 

[Sedona722]

Juan and his experts have presented an illogical theory of the crime. Chiefly, that a stabbing came first in the shower. There's almost no blood splatter in the shower to support the assertion that a flurry of stabs took place there (indeed one jury asked a question about this, saying, "could the shower have been cleaned of blood?"). It is simply more logical that the gunshot came first for a number of reasons. Being far less risky is one. !

BBM by me. Snipped for space.

Regarding the first bold, the water was running, the blood splatter would be washed away.

Second bold, I was an ER nurse for over 20 years, in between being a CCU nurse. There is no way the GSW was first. If he had been shot first, the heart pumping would have caused immediate swelling of the forehead and eyelids, besides the fact that he would have slumped over immediately in an unconscious state. I have seen too many GSW wounds like the one Travis had and not one of them were conscious or able to make a lunge as JA reported.

Nope, don't believe it. The fact that he was stabbed in the superior vena cava caused him to extravasate into his chest cavaty losing heart pump ability, therefore, circulating blood would have stopped and thus no swelling in the temporal facial area. With a pumping heart, every GSW has immediately swelling in this area, it is the way the body works. Travis did not have this. Read the autopsy report, the ME was totally correct in his evaluation.

 

[geevee]

Maybe he thought if she was going to blackmail him with the ph sex tape he would take the pictures to show everyone what a *advertiser censored* she was. He might not have told her he deleted the pictures.

Maybe he didn't delete them at all and it was her that deleted them.
She may have taken the shower pics to keep as her trophy's but decided that might be a bad idea and deleted them.

She might have been thinking to take the camera card with her but when things got so messy decided to throw it in the wash and the bleach and water would erase everything.

I don't think it was physically possible for TA to have taken the picture of her 'you know' at 1:42:00 and then 50 seconds later she takes a picture of him lying in bed relaxed. Whether or not he looked asleep (or half asleep), he couldn't have attained that position in that amount of time (and why would he try?) - she took all the nudie photos, I think the last one of his tossing the bottle of KY at her is evident of him not knowing any were being taken as all of those of her were before those of him.

 

[SweetT]

Someone mentioned up post that it was gonna be hard to prove premeditation due to the fact jodi had sex with Travis prior to the killing. I think this was 2 fold. 1. she had time to waste till his room mates left and by having sex he wouldn't suspect anything bad going to happen and
2. She wanted a last fling before killing him. I personally have had sex right before I broke up with someone just cause he was good in bed and I didn't want to screw (pardon the pun) myself out of sex just cause I was breaking up with him.

 

[Really?]

Foe all those asking...I watched the end of yesterday's testilying and heard the judge tell the jury they are excused until 1 pm Arizona time.

So yes...trial for us on the east coast will start at 4 pm

 

[JusticeJunkie]

There is no possible way this jury is going to acquit. She's toast.

 

[Clue Finder 55]

I don't think Juan buried anything. I think where we will see it come together is on cross. I do not think Juan said the belief is Travis was stabbed in the shower and if he were there would not be splatter within the shower because Jodi admits she washed everything down in the shower while Travis body was in there. No one knows what really happened because Jodi has lied so much. Juan does not have to prove what came first only that there was premeditation. Getting the knife is premeditation. Stabbing him nine times in the back is premeditation, cutting his throat is premeditation because she could have stopped at any time. She had two exits, it's not as if there was no exit for her, she had a choice of two. There is no blood whatsoever in the closet and yet she claims (according to Samuels' notes she was covered with blood when she came to her senses driving through the desert). How could that be when she had to get through the bedroom, down the carpeted stairs and out the door without a sign of blood anywhere?

Give the jury credit for being able to process this information in an intelligent, objective fashion. Their questions prove they are paying attention. They are clearly committed to this trial. jmo

Premeditation is going beyond using a reasonable force to stop an attack- Once a person is disabeld enough you can flee and call athorities.

When you continue to stab someone knowing you are going to cause their death(THAT IS PREMEDITETED) After being stabbed 20 or so times he would not have been a threat anymore and she could have left the house and got help, but to the slit his throat is going way beyond using enough force to stop an attack such is in self defence
When you throw the gun shot into the whole thing that even adds more to the fact of premeditation.
Just the fact of using two different weapons gives time in between using either one to reflect that if you continue you are causing a persons death so by doing so shows premeditation period.

 

[SweetT]

Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

Not if its been rinsed out after the fact.

 

[Davia18]

It's VERY important for the defense. It's an attempt to explain her "black out" ploy as well as argue for temporary insanity regarding the overkill. If the jury believes it, she will be acquitted. It's that simple.

Further, judging from the juror questions to Jodi, the jury doesn't believe premeditation IMO. Thanks to Juan, this whole case is going down the drain. Sounds harsh?

Let me explain;

Juan and his experts have presented an illogical theory of the crime. Chiefly, that a stabbing came first in the shower. There's almost no blood splatter in the shower to support the assertion that a flurry of stabs took place there (indeed one jury asked a question about this, saying, "could the shower have been cleaned of blood?"). It is simply more logical that the gunshot came first for a number of reasons. Being far less risky is one. Another reason is that it's utterly foolish and unnecessary to leave behind gun evidence that could link her to the May 28th "burglary" of her residence. And this notion about how she wanted to make him suffer isn't going to cut it when you're talking about a female perpetrator and a predominately male jury. They won't buy it. What does this mean? That Jodi's sequence of events is far more plausible and this could tremendously help her credibility with the jury.

Not even one attempt to explain the ceiling photo and dropped camera photos that Jodi is using to support her version of events. He has not stressed that the camera was on the ground at the end of the hallway, inconsistent with the camera falling to the mat and rolling by the bathtub. The explanation that it got kicked over there is also inconsistent with the crime scene, as no evidence of a commotion occurred in that area, and based on the layout of the bathroom it would require two or three "kicks" to have the camera end up to where the dragging picture was taken (stretches credulity). Or one very hard kick that would cause it to bounce off the walls but then we'd expect to find external damage on the camera and there was none. He has left this wide open but Jodi has not and that could be a very big problem. He has provided no explanation for this and she HAS!

Juan BUNGLED twice now with the issue involving the shower ruse. First, during cross, he badgered Jodi -- incorrectly stating that her repeated attempts to convince Travis to take a photo of him shaving happened on the same day as the murder. She clearly was talking about an incident from a previous date. The sad thing is, Juan didn't need to do this because during the same taped interview she admits to convincing him a second time too -- this time on June 4th for a "Calvin Klein shoot", to which Travis initially responded "I feel so gay". That the issue of who suggested the shower shoot might have been lost on the jury thanks to Juan's bungling could spell disaster for the case!

Why? Because it is germane to the whole issue of premeditation. If the jury believes that Travis suggested the photo shoot, premeditation falls apart. And that's exactly what she told Samuels -- that he suggested the pictures. Jodi lied to Samuels about it because she knew that it had to do with her premeditation of the murder. Juan had an opportunity to expose this lie, but his previous bungle with Jodi on cross allowed both Willmot and Samuels to challenge him about this "inconsistency", referring to his prior incorrect statements concerning that taped interrogation, effectively burying the issue -- possibly implanting in the minds of the jurors that it was Travis who convinced Jodi. And Juan buried it further because he still refused to admit that he was WRONG. It was not an "interpretation", Juan. It is fact that she was talking about a prior incident. This bungle is MAJOR! And here's the funny (sad) thing, Jodi herself acknowledged on the stand that YES she did convince him to take the photos on June 4th, not once but twice. Once under direct, once during cross. Juan could have used those statements to challenge Samuels, but no, he had to be stubborn!

No effort to explain why she had sex with him on the day she planned to kill him. This alone argues against premeditation. It is often brought up by Jodiphiles to support their side. Juan has let the defense characterize the state's case as one involving a contract killing. This was no such case. Jodi had an emotional attachment and likely had second thoughts about going through with her plan to kill him (but was later re-triggered and had to clean up her sex mistakes with a shower ruse).

Failure to establish a credible motive. The Cancun crap is ridiculous when we have the May 26th exchange and the May 28th burglary. She was motivated by RAGE over him trashing her verbally, not jealously. Jodi would frequently shake over these verbal arguments by her own admission and on May 26th, she snapped and had enough. That's the motive! Not Cancun. Juries need motives -- credible ones.

Unless Juan can work a miracle in rebuttal, Jodi has a very good chance of being acquitted of all charges!

I'm feeling a little like I have been in the twilight zone if any of this is true
Unless myself and many others here are watching a different trial than you or are seeing different evidence then you non of this is making sense.
So lost right now

 

[Sustained]

Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

BBM - How do you know ? Were you there ?????

And you're dreaming if you think the jury is going to believe Samuels' PTSD diagnosis when it was based on a story that Arias MADE UP ...


:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[Callisto]

Hi

Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

Samuels admitted on the stand the PTSD test and diagnosis were made while JA was lying to him about the intruder story! He said on the stand perhaps he should have readministered it, but he never did! He admitted he ignored relevant inconsistencies and did not add them to his report. Anyone who believes this man and his diagnoses are valid or believes a word JA says must be a gullible imbecile incapable of logical thought processes.
MOO...

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2

 

[Kensie]

Don't mean to be a "downer" but I still worry about there being 1 out of 12 who could believe or sympathize with JA. And that's ALL it takes...1 out of 12!

Question: how are the final 12 selected? By judge? Attorneys? Randomly? Pull numbers from hat?

I get nervous too. The jury seems to be intelligent but there are idiots all over the place in all walks of life. I just hope that the jury does not have any sympathy, empathy or any other feeling towards JA except total disgust.

The fact, the people on the forum and talk shows think JA may be acquitted scares me too.

I guess I am just nervous about the outcome.

 

[katiedid2]

She did not just want to kill Travis. She wanted to get back at all those friends who told him to get rid of her. This is one way she could do that which did not involve her personally where they would say it was HER fault. She really is the lowest of the low. Thankfully it never worked on his friends so she basically failed. She failed killing him and it appears she has failed to dishonor his memory.

Didn't you just love it when JM kept asking about Jodi lying about the breast pictures and Samuels could not get past the fact that it was not illegal and not that she was lying to him. He feels the fact that she lies is not significant. Wow. So if he knows she is a liar there is no way she could have lied on the test. He is such a swell person he just knows she would not do that to him....stab him maybe, lie to him....of course not. It's as plain as day. He just can't understand why we can't all see it. I think he is genuine about that and will be until the fog lifts.

And if Jodi were released because of his testimony and she killed again, his comment to the media would be....."Well, I guess I should have retested her when I knew for sure she was lying." jmo

I have this weird feeling that this quack has all her naked vulgar pics
Pinned to a bulletin board somewhere! In his rv
It just gives me the creeps his attraction to her. I don't think it's professional! Considering her ability to manipulate men sexually. I wouldn't doubt one bit! Or would be surprised to find that! He puts money on her books.

 

[Isabelle]

I am only addressing this one part. If someone snaps on May 28th, how then do they not commit the murder until June 4th? That is not snapping, that is premeditated. imo

Maybe she did snap on May 28th, then went into planning mode!