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

[bsk]

Just saw a clip of ALV from today... Besides being so ...*nothing*... (not useful, not harmful, not meaningful, not memorable), I'm personally getting a lot of mileage out of her statement that, from her father (why mention *just* her father?), JA learned about loyalty, and how to give up things she might want for herself.

If statements were food, this would be a blob of room-temperature unsalted, un-buttered mashed potato. On a grey plate.

Loyalty, huh? Dropping out and leaving home at 15-16 and being distant ever since... doesn't scream 'loyalty' to me.

Neither does dog kicking.

Neither does taking a 3 day, 3 state, 3,000 mi 4-5 guy (Matt, Darryl, Paul, John Dixon-gallery guy /fell through/, Travis, Ryan...) road trip (which includes butchering an innocent man that you are supposedly overly loyal to? And Travis is the player??)

Neither does her religious 'dabbling'.

And so it goes...

ALV is confused.

BBM - It was a nice demonstration of ALV's "men are the problem" attitude when she brought up JA's alleged frustration over TA not agreeing to be "monogamous" like she was. GMAB - Her definition of "monogamous" is "not engaging in ménage à trois". Otherwise anything is fair game.

Along those lines, she also said JA and DB (or whoever it was) were "through" when she met TA. I had gotten the impression she met TA and saw him as her meal ticket, and then dropped DB like a hot potato after they had practically been living as a married couple for years.

 

[TigerBalm]

I would love to see the 6 hour unedited 48 Hours interview that ALV spoke today of reviewing.

I would also love to see the 4 (or more) hour police interrogation video.

:computer:

 

[strawberry]

They start talking about these emails about 30:31

[video=youtube;z4bTzT-c0DI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4bTzT-c0DI[/video]

 

[popsicle]

I don't think Chis is suppose to be talking to anyone about this case.

Isn't his admonition not to watch the trial or talk to/be on media?

 

[Schuby]

Um, was any of this substantiated? The defense has not been able to prove this. Don't you think the DT would have proved this if they could?

Lisa Andrews testified that he was sleeping with Jodi while they were in an exclusive relationship. That is a cheater, which is different than an abuser, to me.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

I'm so angry with the way things went in court today my DH doesn't even want to discuss it with me :furious:. I think the DT scraped the bottom of the scum bucket today when they tried to besmearch the reputation of the prosecutor just to score some points in an unwinable trial. They are pathetic (jealous MUCH Nurmi). Mods please don't view this as derogatory towards the defense, because it's simply truth. These kinds of tactics put the DT's character into question. How low will they go? Nurmi seems to have studied the JB Youtube videos and picked up some pointers. Well, I have news for you Nurmi...at least JB wasn't trying to blame the victim of the crime for their own murder.

I'm betting the jury is just as disgusted with them as I am. I can't see any one of them being the least bit taken in by what they're trying to pull here. She's still going to fry in the end. It's just making them look really, really bad in the process. I am all for her having a rigorous defense, but there's a difference between rigorous and ridiculous. MOO.

 

[4Jacy]

I don't think Chis is suppose to be talking to anyone about this case.

I agree. I think Chris has talked enough. What is the relationship between Chris & Sky Hughes and Travis' family at this point, anyone know? TIA

 

[JRS_JD2L]

Agreed ! But I'd like to know the judge's reasons/law for allowing them in through Ms. Laviolet. I must not understand hearsay.

I posted this earlier: Emails can be hearsay, it depends what is in them and what they are being used for. There are a ton of exceptions, including hearsay [per Rule 703] that underlies the basis for the expert witness's testimony (i.e. the emails and JA's reported "history" with TA). ALV can testify about this hearsay if it underlies her expert opinion, and its probative value outweighs the prejudicial effect. There was assuredly a pretrial motion about all of this, and the judge let it in.

 

[TorisMom003]

Lisa Andrews testified that he was sleeping with Jodi while they were in an exclusive relationship. That is a cheater, which is different than an abuser, to me.

Actually Lisa's testimony was that Travis's roomate told her that Travis was still sleeping with Jodi while being in an exclusive relationship with Lisa. Lisa wrote the long email to Travis because of this information and the email that was written while she was very upset was used by the defense. Lisa then explained the actual situation during cross with Juan.

 

[MandyLeigh]

Sorry if this is O/T but..
[video=youtube;G5kcGaCAxXo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5kcGaCAxXo[/video]

How many of you would have enjoyed hearing"I've already explained it will be under seal. I have already ORDERED you to do it. Now provide the information or I Will Hold You In Contempt." Instead of shutting down the cams, going into the back rooms and patting Gus like he is a puppy dog.

I just want a kick arse judge to take control of this court room. This whole process could be done with proper court days and hours with a fair judge. Fair does not mean pet you like a puppy. Fair means by the law.

 

[katiedid2]

Okay, I just have to get this out of my system:

Every time someone mentions Chris Hughes' hearing testimony, all I can think of is this:

:snake:​

Hiya :seeya:
Oh yes he called Nurmi a snake DIDNT he call him a pig? Too

 

[Schuby]

I posted this earlier: Emails can be hearsay, it depends what is in them and what they are being used for. There are a ton of exceptions, including hearsay [per Rule 703] that underlies the basis for the expert witness's testimony (i.e. the emails and JA's reported "history" with TA). ALV can testify about this hearsay if it underlies her expert opinion, and its probative value outweighs the prejudicial effect. There was assuredly a pretrial motion about all of this, and the judge let it in.

JRS, could I take advantage of your education for a moment and ask you for a general definition of hearsay and why it is not admissible?

 

[looneymama]

Remember when JA herself explained that single Mormans are supposed to date with the goal of marriage so they are discouraged from spending too much time with one person if they aren't planning on marrying them? She said they are encouraged to go on dates with more than one person...yet she tries to make Travis seem like a jerk for doing just that.

I really feel like he was just looking for a wife but she thought she could keep him for herself. I don't believe they ever really had the same opinion of what they were to each other. For example, her telling people she was his girlfriend and him telling them otherwise. She did everything she could to sabotage his attempts at finding a wife. Right until the end.

Sent from my NookColor using Tapatalk 2

 

[mikeysmommom]

I loved the part about Nurmi being a snake because he is!!!!!! No offense to snakes intended!

 

[Schuby]

Actually Lisa's testimony was that Travis's roomate told her that Travis was still sleeping with Jodi while being in an exclusive relationship with Lisa. Lisa wrote the long email to Travis because of this information and the email that was written while she was very upset was used by the defense. Lisa then explained the actual situation during cross with Juan.

Dear Travis' roommate,
You're a terrible wingman,
Best,
Schuby

 

[Angelina Frost]

BBM

Some jurors are. Don't forget, the first Menendez trials resulted in TWO deadlocked juries. :what: They had to be retried. The first Phil Spector trial also resulted in a deadlocked jury. Then we have Robert Blake, et al, who walked free.

I sadly agree and think that the level anxiety people are expressing here is completely justified. Many are still (rightly so) sporting serious psychological wounds after the mess in Florida.

I was wee when the OJ verdict came in- still can't believe it to this day. Despite all the theatrics, I was convinced he'd be found guilty with the DNA evidence the State had.

Nothing is a guarantee when it comes to 12 arbitrary people who bring their own personal luggage set to a trial.

 

[Equinoxical]

Isn't his admonition not to watch the trial or talk to/be on media?

Thank you!

Isn't this the kind of information we suspect the defense team of trolling for on here?

 

[ClosArgs]

Um, was any of this substantiated? The defense has not been able to prove this. Don't you think the DT would have proved this if they could?

I agree, who said TA was emotionally abusive except JA? The only time I have heard TA's voice was in the infamous sex tape and JA seemed very much aware this relationship was a physical one, it wasn't about marriage. And so what? A friends with benefits relationship is abusive? I call bs...

 

[Meemaw12]

It's my understanding that JM fought to keep those emails out......

He may have, I am trying to find out, however the Defense is bringing them in through the back door. I can't imagine what the jury is thinking about this testimony today, might as well just clear it all up, make sure they have both sides of this sick mess being spewed.

I am getting angry and I don't like to feel this way, it is very upsetting to hear this crap.

The way I feel, I don't care if TA laid down in the street, naked, begging for sex with 100 women, he didn't deserve what happened to him. Just like I would say about any female doing the same thing.

This defense is so wrong and out of bounds in this case.

I can only think about the Westerfield trial and how Danielle's parents were treated by the defense and thinking about it brings me back to realize, he is on death row with a lot less evidence.

The jury will get it and do the right things. I pray.

 

[JRS_JD2L]

JRS, could I take advantage of your education for a moment and ask you for a general definition of hearsay and why it is not admissible?

Would be happy to, but heading out to the opera. Here's a quick def. -- I'll post something more comprehensive a bit later.

Hearsay is an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted...and then there are many, many exceptions, like the one I posted.