trial day 38: the defense continues its case in chief #112

[geokaren]

I have not seen the photos or videos that fomented that nonsense this morning from Nurmi - anyone can point me to it?

 

[legalmania]

I think of Cheney Mason pushing his way thru crowds of reporters dropping profanities, but JM endulging folks with a photo is deemed misconduct. OY! What is wrong with this picture??!!

I think Martinez should wait until the trial is over. If he wants to give a short interview with the media, I don't see anything wrong with that. He is suppose to be fighting to have someone put to death. IMO it makes it look like it's becoming about him. He needs to remember he is working for Travis and his family, not to become a celebrity. I remember Judge Seidlin in the Anna Nicole case, I was asked to do some research for him, I noticed with all the media attention he began to act differently. He was talking about getting his own t.v. series.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

wow. i learned something new today.
thnx i think

Wow me too! The things you learn on the internets!

 

[missy1974]

Gotchya, I think.

So the 1st set of emails re; Chris / Travis were the ones he sent in 2007 when he met Jodi as in 'don't do it man' ..

Then there is a second set written by Skye between herself and Nurmi after Nurmi told her that there were letters from Travis showing pedophilia which were shown to be forgeries <insert MM here>

And this is being allowed in how? Clearly the DV witness knows these are fake, and she is alluding to them because?
It is revolting to me that this messed up piece of work gets to play out her sick games in a courtroom and rope in qualified people to do her dirty work for her. She must have been in absolute heaven preparing for this trial, she must have thought it would be an absolute triumph.

Epic fail.

Did she speak about the forged letters?? I may have missed it, when my kids come home for lunch I have to turn it down, because of all the sex talk. I would be surprised if that was allowed though.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Arias kicked the dog clip: start 41 seconds in

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/03/...ses-she-kicked-dog?clusterId=1303#videoplayer

 

[Jimmynap]

I just watched the hearing again. The emails were admitted, under seal, for that hearing. So, they were not admitted into evidence for trial at that point, but it does not preclude them from being attempted to be re-introduced at trial...i.e., as the basis for ALV's testimony, or for impeachment purposes in JM's cross, now that we know that she did use them as a basis for her testimony.

Of course, as always, as a lowly law student I am always open to correction from AZ Lawyer or any other attorneys lurking about.

I think they were referred to as exhibit #5 - wouldn't that go to hearing and trial?

 

[Softail]

I think it can be cleared up. The word 'abusive' can mean different things to different people. A Mormon woman might consider it 'abusive' that he wanted sexual relationship with someone. Another woman might consider that normal behavior. JMO

This is very true! I find ALV's testimony abusive!

 

[paperwing]

I wasn't clear. The OP made a good point- instead of having LV interpret the email, why didn't the defence simply call the Hughes to the stand about this so called "abuse"?

Why? 2 reasons (imv):

1. They remember how things went with Lisa Diadone (sp?) when they brought her email into evidence while having her as a witness: LD made it extremely clear that she wrote that email in haste, she was 19, it was one of those 'hit Send and regret it' heat-of-the-moment type emails, etc. Backfire.

2. We'd get the real story behind the email (hope they confirmed that it's legit - electronically and word for word), and intent is key.

Chris Hughes probably was mad at Travis and may have been trying a little 'tough love' because he didn't like what what happening to Travis after JA came in his life. It's very possible Travis expressed his inner guilt and conflict over not staying true to his beliefs that he did insult JA and DID ultimately decide that she was a booty call, and DID know he wouldn't marry her (none of this unknown to JA, she chose to engage)...

The DT may also be wary of Chris Hughes and how willing he might be to protect his friend, especially after what (it appears) he's been through, including being lied to by the DT... the DT may have presented CH with the fake 'pedo' letters and not thinking someone like that wouldn't mislead him about that - may have believed them! How devastating would that be??

I don't think the DT can call Chris Hughes...

What they're trying to do in using ALV this way is just SO lame...

 

[Wishbone]

I think it can be cleared up. The word 'abusive' can mean different things to different people. A Mormon woman might consider it 'abusive' that he wanted sexual relationship with someone. Another woman might consider that normal behavior. JMO

She mentioned many things in her emails. No physical abuse but she believed TA needed counseling due to being damaged by his treatment as a child. I don't recall her mentioning sexual relationships.

 

[Nore]

The 1000 mile drive is going to be a good cross examination quiz for AL.

-----------------------------
To me the drive says it ALL. I hope he asks how many times Travis drove it!!!!
I feel this expert is living in the past. Things change, she needs to re educate herself a bit.

PS. I'm an old coot myself so no slams against her, just a fact. :seeya:

 

[JRS_JD2L]

I think they were referred to as exhibit #5 - wouldn't that go to hearing and trial?

No, because Nurmi moved them into evidence using the language "for the purposes of this hearing only, under seal."

 

[OneLostGrl]

That will really send a positive message. Punching people in the face over domestic violence.

:laugh:

 

[borndem]

Originally Posted by Pink Panther [ame="http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9127920#post9127920"]

[/ame]
Re. ALV's testimony. I have not commented much but...

"If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck - it's a duck"

moo

=============================================
​

I am too disgusted to say anything except things that would get me a TO. I am boiling mad.

Y'all sound like me, aka Mz. Negative-gun-shy -- but, surprisingly, I'm not worried about this additional irritation. Mr. Juanderful won't let this one slide by, I'll predict.

I do worry, worry, worry, but not as much as I did since KCL listed her reasons for feeling very positive about the outcome of the case. (Here's another big :tyou: to ((Katiecoolady.))) I feel, too, that the Head Worrier about this trial is our Brave Juan, and he is takin' names & kickin' azz.

:twocents:

 

[Myvice]

She is now testifying as a DV expert. But back when she sent those books to the killer she was a mitigation specialist.

OK, thanks.

I'm guessing Juan can point out that her initial court duty was to support Jodi through her trying trial where she is forced to admit to all (well some) of the vile things she has done and try to make those around her look as if they somehow coerced her into commiting the vile acts.

I'm anxious to get to the part that shows any kind of justification for thinking Travis would kill her three times over.

At the same time she is dragging Travis' early family life through the mud, she is doing the same with Jodi's. Yet she's making a case that Jodi was not an abuser? I don't get it.

All the rubbish about Travis seeing other women is immaterial as far as abuse because he told her he was doing it and she should too. On the phone sex tape Travis was the one that offered up that he thought what they were doing was wrong and Jodi says but if it's wrong I don't want to be right.

Jodi has said that all the sex was great. She tells Travis she wants to continue blossoming. Geez'

And someone not calling you back for three days is abuse? Really? How the heck do people break up these days without being abusive? If a woman breaks it off is she an abuser too then?

Sorry, rant off. And this was not at you personally. Thanks again for helping me try to make sense out of something that is totally illogical, IMO

 

[KMouse]

I had to come back on and express how mad I am at the DT for taking third party emails and having their "expert" interpret them. I hope the jury is not dumb and just take this at face value. The jury should be wondering why the DT hasn't called the Hughes as witnesses so they can explain their email.

What happened today would be like having a complete stranger take a random email of mine that I sent to my DH and interpret it through their domestic abuse shaded glasses. Oh I asked my husband to pick milk up on the way home. I must have the power in the relationship and am therefore abusive. I am having a temper tantrum about this.

This "expert" should not be interpreting other people's emails. So wrong.

 

[cricket49]

She can explain her definition of "abusive." Which in the mormon dating community could be as simple as not calling when you said you would, dating someone else (even though you're not exclusive) playing basketball with the boys instead of watching lifetime movies.....

What many of us might call a "player" (and personally I think that's too strong for Travis) many mormon (and other marriage-minded young women) girls would term "abusive."

:goodpost:

My thoughts exactly.

I know many people of other religions try to be good based on their beliefs, but they fall short 20 - 30% of the time. They are still good people.

Maybe Travis did not live up to the Morman way of treating women. I am sure in the outside world he might have been considered normal and nothing abusive. Maybe when Skye wrote this email it was when Travis and Jodi started dating and Travis was growing weary of her. Maybe he was a jerk at times to Jodi and Skye did not like that. Once the Hughes got to know Travis and Jodi's relationship, they were no longer on Jodi's side.

 

[katydid23]

They've been ruled inadmissible.

But that was before this 'expert' testimony basing all of her opinions on this email chain. Maybe now that ruling will be revisited. JMO

 

[KandyKane]

Why? 2 reasons (imv):

1. They remember how things went with Lisa Diadone (sp?) when they brought her email into evidence while having her as a witness: LD made it extremely clear that she wrote that email in haste, she was 19, it was one of those 'hit Send and regret it' heat-of-the-moment type emails, etc. Backfire.

2. We'd get the real story behind the email (hope they confirmed that it's legit - electronically and word for word), and intent is key.

Chris Hughes probably was mad at Travis and may have been trying a little 'tough love' because he didn't like what what happening to Travis after JA came in his life. It's very possible Travis expressed his inner guilt and conflict over not staying true to his beliefs that he did insult JA and DID ultimately decide that she was a booty call, and DID know he wouldn't marry her (none of this unknown to JA, she chose to engage)...

The DT may also be wary of Chris Hughes and how willing he might be to protect his friend, especially after what (it appears) he's been through, including being lied to by the DT... the DT may have presented CH with the fake 'pedo' letters and not thinking someone like that wouldn't mislead him about that - may have believed them! How devastating would that be??

I don't think the DT can call Chris Hughes...

What they're trying to do in using ALV this way is just SO lame...

There's no way on earth the DT is going to call Chris. He pummled Nurmi in the hearing, and they don't want him anywhere near the courtroom much less on the stand.

 

[TexMex]

Men = Perpetrators

Women = Victims
in ALVs altered reality

 

[Jimmynap]

No, because Nurmi moved them into evidence using the language "for the purposes of this hearing only, under seal."

Thanks - then how does ALV get to talk about them?