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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wilmot wants to be clear when she says "he says" you are not actually quoting.

take what he said in email and summarizing it.

context and subject matter of the email tells ALV . .
synopsis - TA has written to his friends (objection hearsay and relevance) . .. restate the question
importance of the email
TA has responded to the Hughes and the Hughes have indicated that JA move on from the relationship
objection rule 703
overruled -answer stands

TA has been abusive to women and for her to move on
objection - sustained

Hughes thought TA had previously been abusive to women - ALV looks @ TA in another light . . . . what type of behaviors did TA have based upon what her friends thought?
objection - rule 703
It's her opinion

approach please.
 
Yep, I don't care what she says, it's a conflict of interest when she's assessing a person for a DP murder case!

I would like to know what these books were. Bad enough she's giving JA gifts, to make her feel better about herself, being bored in jail and all, but if these books are about abused women, is she just guiding JA in how to defend herself as an abused, so she knew what her story should be:furious:
 
How is her summarizing what someone else's statements, that are not part of the record, not hearsay?
 
HAHA Willmott! Juan isn't going to let you sneak in your garbage testimony thru this mouthpiece!!!!

Go Juan!!!!!
 
where is this coming from???? are we ever going to see chris and sky hughes?
 
So Wilma got the word abusive out there, and is now running with it.

Sneaky sneaky sneaky.
 
Wow. I can't believe the judge is letting Wilmott get away with her scoffs and looks every time the judge sustains an objection from the prosecution.

She just rolled her eyes when the judge said "approach"!
Incredibly unprofessional.
 
Chris and Sky Hughes are probably on a rampage right now.
 
Hughes told Arias to "move on"? Well, well, well. Just goes to show that Arias takes no advice from anyone.
 
Did the Hughes' really send JA emails warning her about Travis? I've never heard about this.
 
Am I alone in this or is there anyone else who now finds this "expert" to be of even lower quality in personal ethics than Dr. Samuels?
 
Wow! what kind of sneaky crap is the defense up to??? Does anyone know what was said in these emails? and also why werent they admitted as evidence and had the Hughes testify if the defense thinks is so important?
 
I guess JM will be calling the Hugheses as rebuttal witnesses. SMH
 
JA just stares without blinking...very creepy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
248
Guests online
1,771
Total visitors
2,019

Forum statistics

Threads
599,798
Messages
18,099,737
Members
230,927
Latest member
Double
Back
Top