trial day 38: the defense continues its case in chief #111

[websurfer]

So, do I understand this correctly? Jean C heard that DD's "juror" posed with JM for a picture and it was misinterpreted as one of the real jurors? I've seen the video on HLN and I heard Jean C say that it may not be a good thing for him to give autographs and take pictures.
That's her opinion and that's okay. Everyone has one.
So how in the world did she end up on the stand? I am so confused.
:banghead:

:banghead::floorlaugh:

 

[outofstatelawyer]

On another forum everyone seems to thinks it's gonna be Tricolor that does it.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, nobody is "on" that jury yet. 6 of the 18 will not be deliberating (unless a juror is removed).

 

[QueenD]

Yes, he has the pic of Katie with JM. Whined about her being a "juror" for Dr. Drew...

Katie will be well known now after today. Cant wait to hear what Dr. Drew says about it.

 

[manzana]

Originally Posted by Miss Behavin View Post
I'm lost on the "tossing salad" comment mentioned upstream.

I googled it and found people actually tossing a salad.

Ok Now I am confused, does this mean you were actually watching *advertiser censored*? or someone with culinary skills.

 

[Curious Me]

I never thought I'd agree with the word "cretin", but my gosh, this woman is dangerous!

Thought I'd throw this in for general info about the word cretin.
Initially, the word cretin meant a health condition before thyroid medicine was around.

Definition of CRETINISM
a usually congenital abnormal condition marked by physical stunting and mental retardation and caused by severe hypothyroidism

 

[strawberry]

Katie was seen in the background of the video clip jean commented on. Nurmi thought she was employed by HLN

Did he say "an HLN employee"? I had to mute him so as not to throw up.:floorlaugh:

 

[Bada Bing]

Mama Arias is wearing a domestic violence pin according to HLN recap at bottom.

 

[Negative green]

I'm lost on the "tossing salad" comment mentioned upstream.

I googled it and found people actually tossing a salad.

:facepalm:

Maybe try the Urban Dictionary..I don't have a clue, and personally it is TMI for me.

 

[Tsunvirtual]

I've said from Day One, this jury conviction will be decided in the Rebuttal case. ALV is opening the door to make that much easier for JM. In some ways, this trial has yet to begin. Juan has a huge can of whoopa$$ to open up that he hasn't even revealed yet. IMO.

I am so upset that they allowed her to cherry pick from an e-mail to testify to her interpretation. I want to see Juan tear her up and show no mercy. She lost any credibility of being impartial when she did that.

Please let Katie know we all feel she was wronged today too. ((((Katie))))

 

[Gypseagirl]

So is someone going to bring up in court that JA passed her mom a letter via the mitigation specialist?

I wish somebody would bring it up. It was expecting by the DT to do something like that today because of yesterday. Their boat is sinking-I'm just a firm believer of that.
:jail::jail::jail::jail::jail::jail::jail:

 

[Lulu67]

She only paid $300 for them. You get what you pay for. Oh well.

$300?!??? Where did she get them done, at a Tijuana bar?? Who gets their bewbs done for $300?! Seriously. My niece got some "discount" way back when and it was still over $3k. (and the Drs were shady and later got sued)

That's ridunkulous.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

So, do I understand this correctly? Jean C heard that DD's "juror" posed with JM for a picture and it was misinterpreted as one of the real jurors? I've seen the video on HLN and I heard Jean C say that it may not be a good thing for him to give autographs and take pictures.
That's her opinion and that's okay. Everyone has one.
So how in the world did she end up on the stand? I am so confused.
:banghead:

Jean was asked if she actually eyeballed a juror while JM was out front of the courthouse taking pics with ppl. He only signed one "autograph"--a cane of a woman who is there daily. He was out there ONE TIME to do an interview, never before or since.

Nurmi thought that Katie Wick is employed by HLN and he was hoping that a jury member saw him get a pic with her. (No and No)

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I'll give it to Jodi's lawyer today, she was pretty successful rehabbing Samuels on the book thing...through this witness.

I think she made it worse by exposing the emotional connection and bias both of them have for Jodi.

 

[Pensfan]

I think the jury will be asked a more generic question such as: "Have you ever seen JM outside the courthouse?" JC didn't even connect the two as she said she saw the juror smoking at one time and JM at another. Jurors have lives and it's not impossible for a juror to see JM at a restaurant when JM might be talking to someone. If JC said she actually saw a juror watching JM it would be one thing. I just think the judge wants to make sure none of the jurors were around when JM went out that front door.

I guess prosecutors have to sneak around like a criminal so they don't get caught talking to someone who admires him.

Asking the jurors individually if they have seen JM outside the courtroom is prejudicial. This may cause some jurors to believe JM was doing something illegal or immoral outside the courtroom.

 

[fran]

We need to move on over to a new thread. This thread will close in approximately 15 minutes.

Please continue here:

trial day 38: the defense continues its case in chief #112 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[Angelina Frost]

Sadly, I have seen several posts from people who believe that if Travis used her:

1. This would mitigate against the death penalty or even a first degree murder charge and indicate that the most this killing could be would be second degree.
2. If he used her sexually, he likely also abused her and this could very well be a case of self-defense.
3. Travis was a jerk, played with fire and reaped what he sowed (which basically means, despite ardent protestations to the contrary, that the poster believes he deserved to be murdered).

All the defense needs is one such juror. They are banking on having at least one juror who has been incapable of getting over the hurt of a past break up and thus hates men (because they certainly can't bank on an actual DV victim who would see right through jodi's posturing).

But, IMO, the very worst that could happen is a hung jury and I highly doubt that that is going to happen in this case.

IMO, the evidence against jodi, and refuting a self-defense claim, has been so complete, that the defense can hope for a hung jury only if someone on that jury panel is mentally ill or intellectually disabled.

And as I have said repeatedly, jodi has more chance of sprouting wings and flying away than gaining an acquittal in this case.

Quoted for absolute truth. :goodpost:

There is ZERO chance of an acquittal. You are not allowed, by law, to murder someone because they weren't nice to you. It's a fact not in dispute.

The best possible option the DT is to have one person who MIGHT be listening to their nonstop bs with an open mind. There is no more than one, judging by the scathing questions they had for the murderer.

The BEST is 11-1 right now and that one (if they exist in the first place) is not a rogue juror. The case will be won in rebuttal and imo, that lone holdout will cease to exist at that point.

There is NO acquittal coming. There is NO manslaughter. There is NO second degree. There WILL BE murder 1. The DT can stall and dance around as much as they want- there is nothing they can do to stop the guilty verdict.

Have patience and be calm over the weekend. All will be revealed in due course. Bank on it.

 

[websurfer]

I'm in with the IN CROWD[ Websleuth's ]
thanks guys you all make watching this goofy trial almost tolerable...

 

[Brattigirle]

SO each juror is going to be asked about if they saw Juan pose for photographs.

I would think they will have to word it differently.

 

[missy1974]

H wasn't lying to her. He made it clear it that was for sex in the beginning. Unfortunately, his nosy "friends" have just set Jodi free thanks to this stupid email where they threw around loaded words like "abusive" all because Travis wanted to play the field. Idiots. Lost the case because they stuck their noses where it didn't belong.

Well, I have felt from the beginning there was something 'hinky' about the Hughes', and although we have have heard summary's of what the DT thinks is in the emails, we have not seen them. I do however recall Chris saying that Sky only said those things (not specifics) after Nurmi told her it was proven it was Travis that wrote the pedo forged letters. I have always thought, what in the world could she have said in those emails???

Anyway, I don't think this will set her free. There is just so much to counter it. I would love to see Chris and Sky Hughes called to the stand, by either the Defense or Prosecution.

 

[Donnareit]

And SO WHAT if he called her a *advertiser censored* or did any of that stuff? He had no financial or legal power over her, they weren't married, and she "supposedly" thought he was a pedophile...so LEAVE Jodi.

Hope the jury sees that JA lives in her own mind, not in reality. Others cannot be held accountable for her distorted perceptions and demands. The photoshop of her in a doggy door sums it up nicely, she wouldn't leave. TA committed the unforgivable sin of being perceived as having insulted her.

Laviolette is a villain for pushing this nonsense and ignoring what she has to know is the truth.

THE DT is using ALV as a pawn to get the e-mail info in front of the jury. NOW I get it why she was moved to the guilt phase. I do not think she likes being there.

At the evidentiary hearing using just "part" of that e-mail was blocked. Chris Hughes was very upset about KN making him testify about it at all. THEN the DT put the Hughes on their witness list to keep them out of court and to keep them from talking.

Low down.