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

[Whisperer]

She has said this several times...in her testimony in direct and in that interview. If something is true, you don't need to say it over and over to convince them. She is trying hard to make herself seem more normal than she actually is.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

BIG RED FLAG! She is dancing around spouting how much she loves dogs every chance she gets. This may have been the major event in the family and why they didn't care if she left home. They wanted her gone! Did you hear how she had to say the family didn't kow how to care for the dog? OMG...this is so Borderline! She used the family as a reason the dog had a horrible life, chained to a fence. Wanna bet she did something to the dog because she hated it for making her life miserable that day. She had to clean up the mess the doggie made by getting in the trash can. GMAB!

So the dog had to go....besides, the family didn't know how to care for it anyway.

....poor doggie boy! :furious:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

She killed the dog.

 

[Whisperer]

Do you think we can handle anymore stories about her temper? She hates her mother because her mother confronts her and is on to her antics. She probably hates her father more but he is stronger than she. It appears ms. ja likes to pick on living things that are vulnerable.

Her prison life should be interesting for her. Many inmates can see right through her carp.

 

[Whisperer]

She killed the dog.

I know and I am furious Mrs. Norris. :furious:

 

[neesaki]

Comes from her taped interview with detective. I don't think the jury heard it. I'm not sure tho


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How strange. I can't believe she would tell something like that to anyone much less the detective. :waitasec:

 

[neesaki]

She killed the dog.

What?!:what: I was wondering if she had any history of torturing animals as a child, but that was before I heard this.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

She had scratches on her arms from the cat when she was arrested too.

 

[katiewonders]

Yeah...she either killed the dog or beat it so badly it ran away PERMANENTLY. That added to the cat abuse (x3) = me writing to Arizona corrections once she's convicted to keep her away from animals forever. Huge violence in Jodi for years ... Tire slashing, mom abuse etc etc .. Grrrrrrr!!!!

Wait a minute, JA is a liar - we now choose to believe her when she said she kicked her dog? I think she told Flores that story to just illustrate how she felt about Travis. IMHO

 

[Wishbone]

What?!:what: I was wondering if she had any history of torturing animals as a child, but that was before I heard this.

here's the video link

Arias admits she kicked dog before it ‘ran away’

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/03/25/watch-jodi-arias-confesses-she-kicked-dog

 

[Applejack]

The death itself is not evidence of first degree murder. Just of murder. Manslaughter is murder. (well - maybe it's different in the US > but here - manslaughter (voluntary) is a provoked murder).

The prosecution presented several circumstances to support that the murder was planned, not spontaneous. It rests on believing whether or not JA brought the gun. As there is no evidence she did so (just a contention by the prosecution) - I'd be reluctant to find for 1st degree. But I'm pretty strong in the belief that a capital case needs to be held to a very high degree of proof.

Regardless - I'm not on the jury - so just sharing my ideas here - and reading others ideas.




I actually said "hating and demeaning" - which should be quite different from "discussing". I'm a firm believer in discussion.

This is totally off.

1. The murder itself iIS evidence of 1st Degree. As Juan explained at a hearing, the intent to kill can be formed in a heartbeat. So even if she didn't go there with the intent or at least the possibility of killing him (which she clearly did), 1st Degree still applies because at some point Travis was no longer a threat and she chose to kill him a few more times anyway. That is still 1st Degree by AZ law.

2. It does NOT in any way rest on believing she brought the gun. However it has been proven that a gun of the same calibre was stolen from her grandparents, where she lived, one week prior; and there is no evidence Travis had a gun AT ALL. But putting that aside, she killed him with a knife. A knife she may have brought or just figured she'd comveniently grab from his house.

3. There has been a mountainof additional evidence proving premed. You don't have to prove a weapon was brought to prove premeditation.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Have you guys watched the video? It's up thread .. A link is on HLN (sorry I'd link but I'm on the iPhone) .. I think she's trying to say the worst thing she ever did in her life was the story of her kicking the dog. Flores is sick of hearing her bs at this stage and is simply wrapping up the interview.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Thanks Wishbone!!

 

[BunnyHop]

She had scratches on her arms from the cat when she was arrested too.

Where does the dog story come from? TIA.
So much to keep up with here. :blushing:

eta: found it
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/03/25/watch-jodi-arias-confesses-she-kicked-dog

 

[alwaysonmymind]

I missed the part yesterday about hitting her Mom in 2008. Was this said in open court or taped interview?

If it was in court, any details on juror reactions or her mom?

Tia


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JayB12]

To be fair, the defense aren't going to pay her to be up there to say Travis was a wonderful guy and never abused her.

She has already made it clear to me she only see's men as the abusers and thats only from yesterday

JMO

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

BBM...I agree. Can't wait for her unbiased professional opinion.

 

[VALee]

Wait a minute, JA is a liar - we now choose to believe her when she said she kicked her dog? I think she told Flores that story to just illustrate how she felt about Travis. IMHO

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.

 

[BunnyHop]

Um... I am not a violent person. Never have been. Never will be. But if I hear someone say they kicked a dog for any reason...

I
start
to
freaking
growl
literally.

PS: Kicking a dog is abuse. Based on what JA described, she kicked a dog that was ALREADY abused and neglected. She kicked a dog because DIAPER GEL got messy?

IS she bloody kidding me????

She kicked this poor dog (why? Why the heck would a dog get into diapers - which were in the garbage? Why? Because the dog is freaking hungry! If it isn't hungry, then it is stressed - because it was tied up in a yard, alone (and probably hungry - including starving for attention).

So the dog gets of it's chain/leash, and strews the diaper gel (and baby poop - probably what the dog was looking for because it was HUNGRY) all over the yard.

What could JA do? Lets consider the possibilities:

1. look at the mess, roll her eyes like many a teenager, call mom and say "Your dogs are freaking crazy. I'm not going out there and cleaning up after that. I empty the dishwasher - I'm not dealing with all that baby cr**, Mom."

2. She could have cleaned up the diaper mess, realized the dogs were hungry, fed them, given them water, played with them for 2 minutes and never mentioned anything because it wasn't a big deal. It was part of living in a house. You see a mess, you clean it up. OR, if you are an older sibling taking care of dogs and other stuff after school, you negotiate a raise in your allowance.

3. She looks outside, sees the diaper gel (NO, her first worry is NOT, "Oh my Dog! Does that stuff harm the dogs if they eat it??? Call 911! My dog might've eaten some babysh** gel and I don't want him to die!"), goes outside - after the fact...

Wait.

Let's back up a minute (sorry guys). JA looks outside and sees the diaper gel all over - a mess.

She goes outside.

She kicks the dog/ Because: (um...)

No one ever sees the dog again.

Um. Let me rephrase.

NO ONE EVER SEES THE DOG AGAIN.

Putting it another way:

NO ONE EVER SEES THE DOG AGAIN.

In the interview she also says the family didn't know how to care for a dog and give the attention needed. Barf.
I detest animal abusers. :furious:

 

[suzyq211]

How strange. I can't believe she would tell something like that to anyone much less the detective. :waitasec:

After watching a few times I realized she turned this story around and it was all about her. After kicking the dog, he hardly reacted so it wasnt that bad. ;-) She was actually looking for sympathy,after all she had to clean up poopy diapers!

ETA: I dont know if I even believe the diaper story. IMO she would have "forced" her mother to clean it up.

 

[VALee]

She said after starting her career working with battered children and women, it was hard to work with the men that abused them. Who can blame her? But she also offered up, im sure to the displeasure of the DT, that men have come in abused, and men can be abused as well. i think her testimony will be fairly unspecific to Travis, noncomitted, and easily flipped by Juan.

I heard Jean Cesarez (sp?) say once on HLN, can't find it, but remember it, that she had seen the deposition JM did with AL, it basically wasn't pretty.

IMO, AL seems okay to me, but she does only have a Masters, not a PhD (I don't mean that negatively, I have a Masters, not a PhD), but hardly the education/caliber of witness I would want as a DT if defending a client on Murder 1 charges. Will see how it goes, but as of now, does not appear this is going to be a rescue for the defense, and we still have JM's rebuttal case, which we already know will be loaded.

 

[Shadow5618]

What time are we starting today?