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

[LambChop]

We had a weird guy follow us the other day and attach himself to our group and went to lunch w us and was taking photos. I was extremely uncomfortable with it. Katie was texting me across the table saying he gave her the creeps...I ignored him completely, never even introduced myself. We all were careful about everything we said which i later told the gals that was the first and last time im going thru that! We made a hard and fast rule...no more new people at this stage hanging out w us after court. And I had to enforce it yesterday telling 3 women they couldn't join our group for lunch. People just sort of follow the group like they are part of it. We've circled the wagons now.

Hope he paid for lunch. Makes you wonder if he was a PI working for defense??? Defense may be desperate at this point. You are very intuitive Katie and you are probably right on.

 

[shelley921]

The bolded is what drives me batty about some women. When a man actually verbalizes to you that he has no intentions of being in a long term relationship with you, and you STILL keep sleeping with him in hopes that he changes his mind, that's on you. If you make him think that you are OK with "friends with benefits" how is that his fault? Is he a mind reader now? I agree that when one "uses" the other, they string them along and make them feel as if they have a chance to be a real couple one day. "Just give me time, baby, you know I am not ready to settle down just yet, but... blah blah blah." They make them feel as if they mean the most to them and that at some point, there will be a future. "Using" someone is not "I don't want to be in a relationship with you, but we can still, you know..."

It really, REALLY, bothers me that from the start Jodi claims to have had problems with what Travis was doing. According to the testimony we are hearing, there was really no point that he ever treated her well. That doesn't make the most sense to me. Most women who are turned off by a guy early on just stop talking to him. At that point there is no real emotional attachment because you don't know each other all that well. If I am to believe that Travis made her this uncomfortable, that early on in their relationship, then I have to consider why else she would leave a guy that she was dating to be with him after only knowing him for a week. ALV painted Travis as this successful and powerful man and made it seem like it was too strong of a lure for Jodi to resist. To me, she just sounds like a golddigger.

yes-good post - a gold digger, an opportunist a user, a free-loader, a succubus -!

 

[Liebchenmutti]

My problem with ALV is while she's seems very knowledgeable about DV and those involved in those relationships, she seems a little dated on sexual norms today. When TA called JA a *advertiser censored* star it actually was a complement (although many won't want to admit it) in the context it was used. JA even talked about how money they would make if they did a *advertiser censored*.

Not every communication or action can or should be measured in her DV continuum.

Like Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

ITA! "*advertiser censored* Star" is akin to "Rock Star" and both are used as compliments. ALV has an agenda & she has used "abuse" as a career. She speaks about women having no personal responsibility in abusive relationships--basically, women to her are powerless, helpless, useless and weak.

I'm so sick of this skewed 1970's view of women! Bottom line: if the abused woman is not financially dependent on the abuser, there's no reason for her to remain in the relationship. Period.

Jodi had to physically move her person 1000 miles to "get abused" by Travis.

 

[Juli]

Neither Chris or Sky Hughes have testified during the jury trial.
They both testified in an evidentiary hearing (separate days), where the jury was not present.
The emails have not been entered into evidence, it's hearsay.

I have faith in the prosecutor asking questions on cross of ALV to get his point across. Remember how Juan cleared up the email Lisa wrote during her cross.

Also, the state can call anyone they feel will help rebut evidence the defense has brought forward during the defenses case in chief.

That's what I was wondering about (the bold text). Thank you.

The emails that ALV was interpreting as her opinion - those were the same emails that weren't in evidence because of hearsay, right? My understanding of that is not clear.

If those are the same emails, the DT must be more than desperate to have had ALV talk about them and open that can of worms. JM is going to have a field day.

 

[raisincharlie]

snipped

I think the point is that nobody wants there to be even a hint of impropriety. The defense will jump on anything that even hints of misconduct. There has already been several accusations of prosecutorial misconduct. Why give them ammunition?

The bottom line is that this trial is about the brutal murder of Travis Alexander. The side shows, groupies, fans, .... whatever you want to call them, need to back off and let him finish his job. Looky loos wanting their fifteen minutes of fame via a picture or whatever need to wait until it is over! Then have at it for all I care. I just don't want to see it jeopardize the case in any way.

If I were Travis' family I would be pissed that this is going on. I mean, imagine how they feel? People who have no business injecting themselves into this case causing problems. It is their brother! This trial has been going on for a long time. Day in and day out they have to sit there and listen to the BS going on inside the courtroom. They shouldn't have to be subjected to the BS going on outside of the courtroom. People need to have some respect for this family, and just knock it off!

I do not blame JM at all. I've said it before and I'll say it again, these ignorant people chasing him around should be ashamed of themselves. He is doing the right thing by avoiding the circus at all costs. :twocents:

I have a little different take on this. JM walking out of the courthouse into a crowd of people in and of itself is not impropriety. Provided he says zero about the case, saying hello and acknowledging people who want to thank him for being the voice on behalf of Travis is not improper either.

Those people standing out there, while some may be circus clowns, the majority are not. They are standing out there to make a statement; cold blooded killings and killers need to be pointed out to the majority of people who simply go through life with no concern for anyone but themselves and their little world. It is much easier to sit here at this keyboard and express outrage and believe it does not jeopardize a case - it is as easy to view this forum as it is to see a crowd outside the courthouse. This is afterall a public forum. I fail to see how a crowd outside a courthouse or posters on a public forum present a potential to jeopardize the case because they choose to give voice to their distaste for heinous crimes and slaughters, nor do I see how a show of support for those expending their effort to see that the criminal is prosecuted can jeopardize a case. Those people, even the clowns, have a rite to stand outside that courthouse and voice their concerns. Quite honestly, I for one am sick and tired of all this politically correct bs.

This recent allegation by the defense is just one more act of desperation. If they could find a way to say prosecutorial misconduct because JM acknowledged the fellow at the next urinal, they would try it. If the court is the least bit concerned, they could limit public support to a certain area and instruct the jury to avoid the area totally. This is not a difficult issue to resolve without stepping on the freedom of the many to kiss a killer's butt.

As to Travis' family - I wouldn't begin to try to speak for them.

 

[kaki]

I have a suspicion that sneaks that they are going to have ALV testify to how it's possible that after she shot him, she released her pent up rage against him, or something to that effect. They've already had one jury ask if that was a possibility. I feel like they may try to piggyback off of that.

My thing is, usually when women rage out against a man who is abusive it's when they've been in a long term physically abusive relationship that they could not get out of it. I am just having a hard time feeling as if a woman, who only officially dated a man for 5 months, who lived apart, and even in another state, the entire time, who wasn't stuck, who had no tangible ties to him, would get to the point that she is so enraged by his abusiveness that she would turn around and do what she did. I believe she was enraged, but not by his "abuse."

She was enraged because he was moving on without her. Her sex couldnt even keep him tied to her anymore. i think in her past relationships it was her that decided it was over. She was no longer in control...and she could NOT have that!

 

[Maryann123]

I fell asleep with the TV with HLN on, I had heard NG replaying Jodi interrogation tapes earlier in evening, so they repeated....some noise woke me up in the night. I thought I left the dog outside, this wailing sound--maybe I dreamed it cause the dog was asleep in house.
Anyway, so I'm listening to the TV....caught this from NG repeat of interview of Flores/Jodi
Flores asks Jodi how she left her bloody palm print in the house?

Jodi replies, you found my left palm print? (I don't think Flores caught it.)

Jodi remembers she cut that finger and it was bleeding enough to make that print, in her blood along with Travis'.

I was just thinking about this a little more, and I believe I remember Jodi saying she did cut her hand while she was there, but it was her right hand. Didn't she say that? She absolutely needed to prove that finger was not injured that day in order to claim Travis broke it during a prior rage. That is the only injury she can show that gives a hint that Travis was abusive. I think you have just proven it to be a lie!

 

[TigerBalm]

Nurmi: You also.... had conversations with this man here right? Detective Flores.

C Hughes: Yes

Nurmi: And during those conversations, do you recall Detective Flores saying you could see Travis losing it with Jodi and throwing against her a wall right?

Martinez: I'm going to object to relevance

Judge: Approach

http://youtu.be/z4bTzT-c0DI?t=42m33s

:waitasec: "and throwing against her a wall" ... nice use of the english language in a court of law :lol:

 

[Juli]

I have a little different take on this. JM walking out of the courthouse into a crowd of people in and of itself is not impropriety. Provided he says zero about the case, saying hello and acknowledging people who want to thank him for being the voice on behalf of Travis is not improper either.

Those people standing out there, while some may be circus clowns, the majority are not. They are standing out there to make a statement; cold blooded killings and killers need to be pointed out to the majority of people who simply go through life with no concern for anyone but themselves and their little world. It is much easier to sit here at this keyboard and express outrage and believe it does not jeopardize a case - it is as easy to view this forum as it is to see a crowd outside the courthouse. This is afterall a public forum. I fail to see how a crowd outside a courthouse or posters on a public forum present a potential to jeopardize the case because they choose to give voice to their distaste for heinous crimes and slaughters, nor do I see how a show of support for those expending their effort to see that the criminal is prosecuted can jeopardize a case. Those people, even the clowns, have a rite to stand outside that courthouse and voice their concerns. Quite honestly, I for one am sick and tired of all this politically correct bs.

This recent allegation by the defense is just one more act of desperation. If they could find a way to say prosecutorial misconduct because JM acknowledged the fellow at the next urinal, they would try it. If the court is the least bit concerned, they could limit public support to a certain area and instruct the jury to avoid the area totally. This is not a difficult issue to resolve without stepping on the freedom of the many to kiss a killer's butt.

As to Travis' family - I wouldn't begin to try to speak for them.

:goodpost: Agree with this 1000%

 

[Dmacky]

Financial problems can cause issues in any relationship. I personally think, even though Darryl said he loved her, he was glad to see her go. His child was his number one priority (as it should be) but we all know that may not have been so great for Jodi since she told ALV she practically raised her youngest brother and sister. That seems to be an issue with Jodi or she would have never put it to ALV in that manner. jmo

When she told ALV that she practically raised her brother and sister it was another one of JA's ploy's to get sympathy for herself. She left home at 17, and the kids would have been 4 and 6. Plus Her Highness went to Costa Rica as an exchange student at age 15. When was she raising these kids?? She might have taken the diapers out to the garbage but I bet she actually changed very few. MOO

 

[Lulu67]

We had a weird guy follow us the other day and attach himself to our group and went to lunch w us and was taking photos. I was extremely uncomfortable with it. Katie was texting me across the table saying he gave her the creeps...I ignored him completely, never even introduced myself. We all were careful about everything we said which i later told the gals that was the first and last time im going thru that! We made a hard and fast rule...no more new people at this stage hanging out w us after court. And I had to enforce it yesterday telling 3 women they couldn't join our group for lunch. People just sort of follow the group like they are part of it. We've circled the wagons now.

I'd call those people "dingleberries" - they want to attach themselves and cling on since they've probably seen Katie DDJ and BlueLady on TV (BlueLady in court), and they want a "brush with celebrity." Gross.

 

[Ms.Heather]

When CH testified without the jury present, Nurmi asked him if he would have a problem testifying for the defence and he said "yes".

He said he would have a problem testifying for the defense because she killed his friend in cold blood. But when asked if he would cooperate, he said yes.

What I have learned is that if you have to ask where you stand in a relationship..you already have an idea where you stand. If it is a real relationship that is going somewhere it should be crystal clear to both parties where they stand.

I don't think I had to ever had that conversation with anyone that I dated. Maybe when I was younger and didn't know what was going on... but it was always pretty clear where things were going in serious relationships.

I'd be shocked if the Hughes used the word "abuse" to describe Travis ever, other than the abuse he suffered as a child.

I'd be surprised if the email even says the word "abusive". I would guess that it says things that Travis is doing or not doing in his relationship with Jodi that a Domestic Violence Expert would call abusive. IE: Sleeping with her with no intent on being with her, lying to her about dating other women, not being completely honest with his intentions. All would be considered some form of abuse to ALV. Abuse was probably her own word... As when Nurmi was asking CH about the email he said something along the lines of "treating JOdi in a not so nice way"...

Abusive means different things to different people. We have essentially abused the word abusive because when someone uses it to describe someone today our minds usually go straight to very negative or even violence. That is not the case. Some people believe just making a remark behind the woman's back in a negative manner is abusive.

Bold and snipped for space I agree, like I mentioned yesterday I was a "student" in a Domestic Violence class some years ago. There were so many things that they considered abuse that I never even stopped to think of as abusive. For example, I had just bought a new laptop even though I had a unpaid credit card... to them, financial abuse. I had at some point or another with held sex from a partner to get my way on something... a form of sexual/physiological abuse. When I was in that class, I seemed like I was the most abusive person ever... When in reality, I never hit anyone... I was never ever physically abusive.

Certainly not misconduct but it bothered me. I felt really bad for Lisa throughout her testimony - direct and cross. Poor girl just trying to do her best in a difficult situation, having to admit things like her erection ignorance. Showing that photo with her was not helpful, necessary and cruel. That's also the point where TA's family member(s) were so stunned they ran from the courtroom.

A little sensitivity to all that are caught in Jodi's crossfire would go a long way.

While it was sad that it came out and across like that, I think the point was this case was trailing off into something it wasn't. I can't remember the timing of the photo, but I know the D was asking her about a email that she sent to him when she was upset... Thats not what this trial was about, Scarias killed Travis in a horrendous way, and he was trying to drive the point that no matter what she said to him in an email when she was upset... He didn't DESERVE what he got ultimately.

I really reeeeeally REALLY want the prosecution to show the jury the video of Travis telling that story, but I have no clue how they could get it in. It would have been nice to show the video to Jodi on the stand and ask her if that was how she got her idea of the ninja story.

I also wish that they could play the initial 911 call where Jodi's name was mentioned as the culprit and how she was stalking Travis. It annoys me that they can allude to an email that states that Travis was abusive to women, but we can't talk about that whole doggy door and tire slashing thing.

Isn't it terrible. All the things that we get to see that show to us how terrible she is and just reinforce our own idea of jealousy... The jury can't see because its too prejudicial. It makes following a case this closely frustrating.

 

[beldon]

HLN, specifically "After Dark", is not only stooping to an all new low for ratings with this program, but IMO they are potentially helping the defense.

They've somehow managed (wont go there) to get some experienced, very successful trial attorneys, some of which are extremely good at what they do (why joey jackson!) to argue specific aspects of case in these mock trials for the sake of entertainment.

They might as well be composing a collection of arguments that address each point of contention for the lesser astute (again, imo) KN and JW to follow in their own closing argument. It makes me sick and I feel a need to do more than just tune out in protest.

Is it remotely possible that they arent aware people HATE the concept of this show? Would an avalanche of negative mails or a petition matter? I might have to start one, as soon as I figure out how lol

 

[Chester_from_THM]

I think that woman said Jodi showed up at Sky's and asked point blank, "Why do you hate me?" I imagine there was at least a short discussion which didn't go well prior to Sky's "leave and never come back" order. Undeterred by Sky's edict, Jodi cornered the macaroni-making other mom in the kitchen. What in the world did she hope to get from that stranger? Just mindboggling to me.

Deb, if you know, what did Sky say to her, I mean the cause of why Sky wanted Jodi to stay away?

Did Sky know that Jodi was having sex with Travis in her house?

 

[The Farm]

I will never understand WHY a jury is NOT allowed to see ALL the evidence and just some?
Who has insight on this foggy situation?

 

[kayice]

BBM

That was a great catch!

NG has the transcript to go with the audio/pic, so I'm reading the words while listening. If she didn't have the words, I would not have caught it. But she said "left palm print" after Flores just asked her "why was your bloody palm print left on the wall?" ...something like that..."left" being a verb w/Flores.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

I now think that Jodi & Travis were NEVER a couple (like others have pointed out here). Jodi is the one who made the decision to change her entire life to be near Travis--and that's just not normal or healthy. AVL should be talking about Jodi's psychological inability to make wise decisions & go into the pathology of a woman who meets a man and then ends a 4 year relationship involving property ownership & a small child immediately after meeting a man at a conference.

Also pathological is Jodi's immediate acceptance of Mormonism--she would have converted to Catholicism or Judaism if that's what religion Travis was.

After making these major life decisions based on landing Travis, Jodi immediately uses sex as a means to manipulate him. He was NOT sexually experienced before Jodi. Jodi is more than knowledgeable about anal, oral and lubricants, and she uses sex as a tool of manipulation.

Jodi was knocking herself out to get Travis to marry her or even make her his "official" girlfriend. She couldn't close the deal.

At whatever point that she realized that her crotch wasn't forcing Travis to do what she wanted, she got angry & this rage bubbled right beneath the surface. That's when Psycho Jodi started acting out with the tire slashing, hacking into accounts, intimidating other women & breaking into Travis' home.

She then switched to a "Perfect Woman" persona: It's OK to not make me your girlfriend, Travis. But we have great sex! And we have fun traveling! Let's just do that, and I'll agree that you are a free agent.

Jodi then puts all her strength into becoming sexually attractive and irresistible to Travis under the guise of being OK with just having a friends with benefits relationship.

The whole time she is doing this, she is getting angrier and angrier. Travis is dating "good girls" who don't have sex with him, and he prefers them. Once Travis is married, Jodi will have no place in his life and she knows this. She has lost the game.

Jodi was enraged with Travis for a long time. Travis was too inexperienced and naive sexually to see what was going on. Too bad ALV is so biased towards women as victims because Travis is a classic victim!

 

[DebinGA]

I was just thinking about this a little more, and I believe I remember Jodi saying she did cut her hand while she was there, but it was her right hand. Didn't she say that? She absolutely needed to prove that finger was not injured that day in order to claim Travis broke it during a prior rage. That is the only injury she can show that gives a hint that Travis was abusive. I think you have just proven it to be a lie!

Re TA's imaginary prior rages, would y'all look at the April 2008 entry in the timeline linked below and clear up my confusion over what Jodi testified as being the event/reason for her deciding to move back to CA? TIA

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - trial day 38: the defense continues its case in chief #110


She came by his house with her UHaul packed, Jodi said she and Travis had a big fight, Juan intimated there are pics of her leaving that disprove her claim she was choked the night before. Someone said TA gave her a two-handed middle finger salute as she drove away. She returned a few hours later and spent another few days at TA's house???? Does.not.compute.

 

[kaki]

HLN, specifically "After Dark", is not only stooping to an all new low for ratings with this program, but IMO they are potentially helping the defense.

They've somehow managed (wont go there) to get some experienced, very successful trial attorneys, some of which are extremely good at what they do (why joey jackson!) to argue specific aspects of case in these mock trials for the sake of entertainment.

They might as well be composing a collection of arguments that address each point of contention for the lesser astute (again, imo) KN and JW to follow in their own closing argument. It makes me sick and I feel a need to do more than just tune out in protest.

Is it remotely possible that they arent aware people HATE the concept of this show? Would an avalanche of negative mails or a petition matter? I might have to start one, as soon as I figure out how lol

Thats the dumbest show ever! Makes me lose respect for Vinnie and Mike Brooks. Especially hate "Was Travis a sexual deviant?" The family has to listen to this mess in the courtroom..now this? :what:

They all look like fools. :banghead:

 

[indycornstalk]

I am just absolutely DISGUSTED in this pathetic attempt by the <modsnip> to try and paint nasty Arias as some kind of Domestic Abuse Victim. It's repulsive and it negates all the MILLIONS of women around this world who are and have legitimately been abused. I am a DV Survivor, from the time I was in my late teens and all the way up until my early 30's I have put myself in situations and relationships that were abusive. I have had a lead crystal ashtray whizzed at my head that gashed the side of my head open to the point I had to have 10 staples in my head, I have had massive black eyes, punched in the face like I was a man, bruises all over my body, dragged by my hair throughout the house, running out my front door in nothing but my underwear and NO shoes in the middle of Winter screaming for help from passers by because I was being beat. I sure as heck didn't run BACK INTO THE SITUATION, I RAN AWAY FROM!!! I have stayed in shelters, went without, lost everything and much more horrific scenarios that happened. To have this sorry excuse of a woman have the NERVE to claim she was abused violates everything that is right and just. Travis NEVER abused her, if anything he probably treated her like crap hoping she would GO AWAY and since she is a crazy stalker, she never did. I just hope the Jury sees through her litany of LIES and understand the truth. I don't think I could bear the thought of another Casey Anthony Verdict. That's why I almost wish I never began to get interested in this case. I just do not trust humanity enough to think they will do the right thing and that is terribly sad.