trial day 36: the defense continues its case in chief #106

[josie1986]

What was the felony charged with Felony Murder Charge? Burglary, Kidnapping or both? I didn't hear that charge along the way.

TIA

as far as i know burglary,what i heard was that if you are a guest in someones home and them you attack them you are no longer considered a welcome guest and that becomes the felony

 

[KMouse]

According to what KCL heard Ms Laviolette can not make TA the abuser. This is what KCL wrote in the court observers thread. I hope this correct. Sorry for reposting as it is on the previous page.

katiecoolady katiecoolady is offline
Verified Bad *advertiser censored*


Starting with dessert first I"ll just share from the convo we had with Beth at the trucks before leaving for the evening (new hair looks mahvelous btw)

She said that in an extended hearing with LaViolette before the trial it was decided she can testify to NOTHING having to do with Travis being an "abuser". She can only testify to Jodi.

Maybe you know this...I didn't. This really deflates the defense balloon.

So then she'll testify why Jodi kept going back to an abusive relationship. Same idea.

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

JA is so full of sh@!, she is lying in that "I kicked a dog once" snip. OMG, she is thinking up the story (lies) while she pauses before she says "that I can remember". Watch how dramatic and - quickly - she goes into "I kicked a dog once".

She had to take time to remember the dog kicking story, then tells Det. Flores that "it changed my world as far as the treatment of animals". BS BS BS

C'mon verdict! MHO

Hi Katie,

I think JA kicked a lot of things in her life, but once I heard she kicked her DOG.....I have never been so "HYPER-focused" on the death penalty. She is the abusive person, not Travis. I think this new witness is Not going to testify that JA was physically abused but mentally , Ha!

I trust our man Juan will blow holes through that theory.

Did you hear the part where she wanted to "apologize to the dog!"" Like the dog really wanted to ever see or hear from that family again. That was about the most moronic thing the witch has said--So "Hi, Fido. remember 20 years ago when I kicked you??? lease: forgive me, I now have a BETTER way to release my anger--it is called MURDER,WOOF!!"

 

[Nube7]

Many THANKS to QueenD and to sourgrapes for picture of TA. Still learning how to work this site. Nube7

 

[carnnell]

as far as i know burglary,what i heard was that if you are a guest in someones home and them you attack them you are no longer considered a welcome guest and that becomes the felony

Thank you. Well that makes sense and should be that way!!!

 

[Applejack]

There is no way Arias cornered Travis with just a knife. He would have won that battle had she been armed with a knife only. My guess is that she used the gun to corner him and make him sit down. Then she stabbed him while he sat in that vulnerable position. Yes, an ordinary person would have simply shot him but she is crazy with a capital C. She had all that pent-up hatred that she needed to express by sticking a knife deep inside his body. That must have been the predominant thought in her head. I think the gun was a back-up. The adrenaline must have been through the roof. A woman who is able to cut a man's throat from ear to ear is just unusual to say the least.

"There is no way" is an opinion. And if they're sitting there taking pictures, and she gets him to sit down so he's all crammed into that little shower, not expecting anything, what is so hard to believe about her getting a stab or two or three in before he can even get himself up? Or what if she dropped the camera and had both the gun and knife out? What if the gun was the threat and, as the current Defense Expert will tell you, the "equalizer," and the knife was her preferred weapon to cause as much suffering as possible? I don't know why this is so hard to believe, and why it's assumed a man could never possibly "get himself stabbed by a woman." This isn't the first time it's happened, just Google it.

 

[Lark2]

Yes, I don't think there has been a question about whether or not she will be found guilty. That part is in the bag. She admitted it etc.

Its the DP/LWOP that is really being argued every single day. When JM gets up and can dispel any of the arguments, have JA running in circles with her stories, show how RS really didn't know what he was diagnosing her with.

I can't believe there will be a not guilty verdict though.

What JM has done is take a near water-tight case and seal it in a tomb. There is no question in my mind that she will be found guilty of premeditated murder and receive the death penalty.

And at that point, the best thing her family could do to honor her memory would be to donate her brain to science, the way the Sandy Hook shooter's family donated his brain, and to cooperate with authorities as to her background, like Lanza's family is cooperating. She will never be sorry, but in this way at least she can contribute to the overall understanding of what makes people cold-blooded killers.

 

[thefragile7393]

What was the felony charged with Felony Murder Charge? Burglary, Kidnapping or both? I didn't hear that charge along the way.

TIA

IIRC...burglary? Someone on here explained it really well but I think the gist was if someone is allowed willingly in your home and then they start attacking you they are no longer considered a guest (felony is now being committed) and its a charge of burglary. Someone more well versed can correct me...its early here still lol

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[popsicle]

It can also be considered first degree if murder happened during the act of a felony. Just extra tidbit.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

Also, the jurors do not have to all agree if it is premeditated or 1st degree murder.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I think it's because he cares so much and is so very passionate about what he is doing. Which is, revealing the truth about one of the most evil people walking the earth (MOO), and getting justice for what she did to Travis and for his family. I also admire his strong, assertive, straight forward manner. And, he's a fighter, something that seems to be lacking in today's society. :hero:

So true. :rocker:

The professional TH's, and others, who constantly criticize Mr. Martinez' style used to frustrate me. Now, they just make me laugh. Do they not realise how much this prosecutor brings before the jury that would normally not be allowed in, with his taunting and prodding over seeming minutae?

It's clear to me, anyway, that he doesn't go anywhere that he doesn't want to go with these witnesses. He has in mind exactly what it is he wants to glean from them, and he doesn't let up until he has it smack bang in front of the jury.

Look at what Samuels gave up, above and beyond his general disorganisation and bungling, without realising that was where Martinez was headed all along:

1. Manipulation of the PTSD tests, on three separate occasions.
2. Diagnosis admittedly based on lies.
3. Clear and unprofessional bias toward the defendant.
4. The information that Arias once again attempted to manipulate by threats of suicide, on Nurmi's intent to withdraw.
5. Not only providing Arias with a self-help book, but more importantly that he also sent her greeting cards.
6. Information on defendant's violent behaviour toward her mother.
7. Samuels' need for 'anger management'. (Perhaps LaViolette will help him with that issue).

4 and 5 were shut down by Nurmi, but not until the jury had heard the implication. I believe they trust Martinez not to pull the wool over their eyes, and so these little hints are crucial.

ETA: Thought of another one - that this defence team is not her first. I'm sure I have forgotten a lot more if anyone wants to add to the list.

By the way, I am far beyond the stage of having 'crushes' on men young enough to be my sons. I merely respect Mr. Martinez for his brilliance as a prosecutor. If Arias gets off, it won't be his fault.

 

[paperwing]

Dogs often get into garbage even if they are not hungry, nor stressed. But that is no reason to kick a dog. Actually, other than defending against an attack, there is NO reason to kick a dog. From what i understand, sociopaths often engage in creulelty to animals and move on from there.

Heck I am a fool. Thanks for reminding me!

My dog (well fed, well loved, babied, walked, happy, healthy and loved even more) stole an entire cooked chicken off the counter (never found bones OR the container). The following week he stole 4 bags of halloween candy off the same counter (disclaimer - I was not home when either of these things happened, and I forewarned the human 'culprit' that food shouldn't be left out on the counter - our old boy was newly adopted, so he was new to us but CLEARLY gastrocentric) Never found the candy, bags or wrappers - about 6 months later my boy (see avatar) Zander 'discovered' half of an old empty candy bag...

In both instances (within a week) I rushed him to the vet - so worried about the bones... and then, oh no - chocolate!!!.

Given that the whole chicken was fully cooked and the bones softer as a result - and the candy wasn't pure dark chocolate, my baby was truly miserable with tummy aches and the runs as a result of both incidents but safe (Caution - please don't take this to mean your dog will react similarly... if they eat something toxic or dangerous - take them to the vet, please!).

I guarantee that if either item (or something equally delicious) was within reach, he'd go for it again. The grapefruit and pomegranate are safe...

Thanks for reminding me that dogs are - well, dogs. My guy hasn't destroyed a thing (except those food items) but he's keen on stealing my daughter's bras and shoes (and toys - see avatar - he's had that his 'baby' orca for about three years. Not a stitch broken even though he throws it around and lovingly hides it in the bushes... his baby just gets dirty. He was not amused when my daughter left for an extended period - which is when he decided the orca was HIS). The only thing he will rip or tear is paper. Paper towel is his favorite. But bras and shoes - he doesn't break a single stitch. Goofball Zanderboy.

 

[momof7]

I did not pay attention to the one on stand yesterday. All her background mean nothing to me since time and time again money has come out on top when dealing with these experts. They may twist it just so it fits them. Ill give her a chance but will be quick to turn her off the moment she starts using words like the Dr did "as in this case......" etc. They are going off what a murderer is saying and if they take that as truth then their opinion is dirt to me. I'm sure the DT will make her answer all the questions with TA mean bad man to poor sweet tiny JA. So as long as she does not speak those words above, Ill give her a chance until JM gets her and sees how she does then.

I don't disagree with you about what the dt will go for. However, aren't therapists and physchologists supposed to take the word of the person sitting in front of them, evaluate the possible truthfullness of it but in the end in order to help the person have to see it from their viewpoint whether it is right or wrong. I probably not explaining what I mean. Basically, they know its not the truth but it is part of the diagnosis..paranoia, serial lying. They then have to see things from their view point in order to help them get passed it to the rational way of thinking, learning to cope with the issues they have.

I just think we are really hard on these guys sometimes when technically they are doing their job. IMHO, I am not one of them, but I have seen a few and this has always been my experience. In order to help the patient you have to establish a trust. That trust might be built on lies from the patient.

Kelly

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Yes, I don't think there has been a question about whether or not she will be found guilty. That part is in the bag. She admitted it etc.

Its the DP/LWOP that is really being argued every single day. When JM gets up and can dispel any of the arguments, have JA running in circles with her stories, show how RS really didn't know what he was diagnosing her with.

I can't believe there will be a not guilty verdict though.

Kelly

ITA! I'm just hoping the judge won't let them consider a lesser charge....that combined with IF they believe all the other malarkey from RS.
Can't speak for the new woman on the stand just yet.

I'm STILL waiting on JM's rebuttal. IMO, that whole thing about RS's "feelings" for JA definitely has to come back.
JM wanted to hit that point over and over. AND, he KNEW that RS would NOT admit to it. Just IMO.

For example, bring back the GAS CAN questioning. We were pretty much trying to figure out what the heck was going on about it. It was like "give it a rest already!!". BUT, here it comes...BOOM....JA caught in an out and out lie!! Not just a wee little one, IMO, that was a big whopper.

I'm thinkin that whole can of worms is gonna be opened in the not too distant future...IMO, as always.

 

[rose222]

"There is no way" is an opinion. And if they're sitting there taking pictures, and she gets him to sit down so he's all crammed into that little shower, not expecting anything, what is so hard to believe about her getting a stab or two or three in before he can even get himself up? Or what if she dropped the camera and had both the gun and knife out? What if the gun was the threat and, as the current Defense Expert will tell you, the "equalizer," and the knife was her preferred weapon to cause as much suffering as possible? I don't know why this is so hard to believe, and why it's assumed a man could never possibly "get himself stabbed by a woman." This isn't the first time it's happened, just Google it.

I do believe that the gun shot was last. I just happen to believe that she had the gun close to her from start to finish.

 

[EGirl]

My comments about him are kind of beside the point, to be honest. I don't think it matters in the long run. Even if he turns a juror or two off, they'll still return a verdict based on the evidence. But man, I seriously cannot stand him. I mean to the point that I comment about it here where practically every single person disagrees with me. lol I seriously do not get how anyone thinks he's amazing.

I think you should comment when you want. I like differing opinions when people aren't being mean. :rocker:

 

[neesaki]

lord knows I'm no fan of his, but egads, the yelling today was just wth? I had to turn off my audio completely. I seriously don't know what his major malfunction is. He gets himself so worked up over his own word games that he loses his train of thought constantly. Literally spluttering. Terrible. The defense team isn't that great either, but at least they're not screaming their incompetence at the top of their lungs...oy veh. jmo

I don't get it, I wish I could help. I would just love for you to love Juan. Hey, sounds kind of like a song doesn't it, :giggle: . Ahemm... not to get too psychoanalytical, but is it possible you had negative experiences with someone in your past that JM is reminding you of ? Just a thought. :dunno:

 

[rose222]

ITA! I'm just hoping the judge won't let them consider a lesser charge....that combined with IF they believe all the other malarkey from RS.
Can't speak for the new woman on the stand just yet.

I'm STILL waiting on JM's rebuttal. IMO, that whole thing about RS's "feelings" for JA definitely has to come back.
JM wanted to hit that point over and over. AND, he KNEW that RS would NOT admit to it. Just IMO.

For example, bring back the GAS CAN questioning. We were pretty much trying to figure out what the heck was going on about it. It was like "give it a rest already!!". BUT, here it comes...BOOM....JA caught in an out and out lie!! Not just a wee little one, IMO, that was a big whopper.

I'm thinkin that whole can of worms is gonna be opened in the not too distant future...IMO, as always.

In the Wendi Adriano case according to the Supreme Court " We held in State v. Celaya that “where the sole defense is self-defense so that the evidence requires either conviction or acquittal, any instruction on any other grade would be impermissible.”  135 Ariz. 248, 255, 660 P.2d 849, 856 (1983);  see also State v. Wall, 212 Ariz. 1, 6, ¶ 29, 126 P.3d 148, 153 (2006) (noting that when defendant asserts an “all-or-nothing” defense, the record usually will not support the giving of a lesser-included offense instruction);  State v. Jones, 109 Ariz. 80, 81-82, 505 P.2d 251, 252-53 (1973) (holding that lesser-included offense instructions were not required where evidence at trial and defendant's self-defense theory presented an “either-or” situation requiring either first degree murder conviction or acquittal).   We conclude that the evidence in this case did not support either a second degree murder or manslaughter instruction and that the trial court therefore did not commit fundamental error in failing to give either instruction."

 

[VALee]

I of course go along with the ME but I still think it is possible the gunshot could have come first and maybe the bullet casing rolled to its position in the blood when JA was cleaning up. That would explain the movement of blood spatters around the bathroom and down the hall. There are examples of people who remain mobile with brain injuries. This one was one of the first in recorded psych. history.

Phineas Gage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Agreed, I'm not sure where the casing was, but I do wonder if it didn't kick back onto the sink, then rolled off countertop after TA bled some there or during cleaning and landed in the blood (thus no roll marks thru the blood or blood on top of the casing). JA during testimony said it wasn't there, but that statement did not get explored.

 

[Applejack]

JA is so full of sh@!, she is lying in that "I kicked a dog once" snip. OMG, she is thinking up the story (lies) while she pauses before she says "that I can remember". Watch how dramatic and - quickly - she goes into "I kicked a dog once".

She had to take time to remember the dog kicking story, then tells Det. Flores that "it changed my world as far as the treatment of animals". BS BS BS

C'mon verdict! MHO

I really don't think she was lying... What makes you say that? It takes me time to think of examples of general things as well. I think the story was diluted to suit her needs (I.e. love love loving animals, changed her perspective on animal treatment, the dog "didn't even yelp because I barely kicked him yet I never saw him again and need to apologize to him") when telling Flores about it. I think it was probably worse than what she described.

 

[gngr~snap]

someone posted earlier, sorry, can't find it, that of interest is she kicked the dog, and he was never seen again, emphasis on never seen again.

Wow!
It was CHAINED TO A FENCE ?
Where could it go ? JA is to blame!
:waitasec:

Now I get why she said she had never killed a "person" before
she said anyone... but I know what she meant.

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2