trial day 39: the defense continues its case in chief #117

[Ricki]

This question may have already been asked, but there are way too many posts to go through to find the answer. Will the state be calling the parents? Do we know who they have on their witness list?

Someone here said yesterday that they were going to try to obtain the witness list.
We might know later depending if that person was successful.

 

[Kensie]

Have to get back to work. Keep up the good posts and I will catch up later!!!

 

[nosytrish]

I stopped watching after ALV first day on the stand, I will start watching again when JM does his cross. I'm sort of disgusted that the judge is allowing hearsay from a 3rd person source. Makes no sense.

someone mentioned watching another trial......where can I watch other trials?

 

[Puzzler]

Someone THOUGHT she was coaching Jodi and brought it up to the judge. Seeing as it was nothing considered to be misconduct by the judge #5 stayed on, so that whole business turned out to be nothing.

As for #5's dismissal... she earned it. The judge interviewed each juror and whatever #5 did, said or saw was deemed to be enough misconduct to dismiss her, and this was discovered during those interviews. Jodi nor her defense team could have had her dismissed on a whim. The defense found out about it or another juror might have let it be known they thought it wasn't appropriate and/or showed bias and whatever it was that caused her to be dismissed is on her.

I don't care if she was pro defense or pro prosecution, and at this stage she shouldn't be EITHER - and same goes for the rest of the jurors. If she did something or said something or saw something that showed bias to either faction then she deserved to go. And whatever that something was the judge agreed that it warranted dismissal. I'd FAR rather her be dismissed than not and end up having whatever the issue was be a cause for a guilty verdict to be successfully appealed and a new trial granted for Arias.

I feel badly for her that she was dismissed seeing as it upset her so much, but she DID do something considered to be misconduct by the judge and deserved to be dismissed for it. Hopefully, this one dismissal will be a lesson to the rest of the jurors that they have to be diligent in adhearing to the admonitions and keep their lips zipped and an UNBIASED mind until they begin deliberations since that's their JOB, and it doesn't matter if a juror is biased to one side or the other since NONE of them at this stage should be as that would make them unfit for jury service.

BBM

I began with an unbiased mind the one time I served on a jury for a violent crime. About halfway through the trial, it was pretty clear to me that the defendant was guilty as charged. When we jurors finally got to deliberate, it turned out everyone had come to the same conclusion. We talked over the evidence and the crime for a bit, took our first vote (unanimous), and were done.

I don't think it was wrong of me (or anyone else) to figure things out before the end of the trial. I suppose that made me pro prosecution. If something convincing from the defense had come out, I certainly wouldn't have been averse to changing my mind. And if I had believed for a second the defendant was not guilty of the charges, I would have argued hard against a guilty verdict. I just don't think a juror should abandon their common sense and ability to think during a trial.

I did consider some of the sarcastic questions from the JA jury unnecessary and over the top. (Jodi's def of "*advertiser censored*," the trauma of a bad haircut, etc.) Just because a juror has figured things out doesn't mean they need to flaunt that in the face of the defendant while the trial is still in progress.

On the other hand, it must be torture to have to sit in that courtroom and listen to the protracted ramblings/chirpiness of JA's defense team for so long. I'll admit the over the top jury questions were cathartic for me, and probably for them, too.

Crossing my fingers that nothing else comes up to distract the justice train for Travis!

MOO

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I can not even imagine the singing Mormon" O" family, doing the stuff she and TA did to avoid not being virgins? Just can't imagine that...

Aw man, Donny O was my idol...LOL.

but to stay OT here...public image and private reality are sometimes two very different things. NOBODY really ever knows ANYBODY - unless you live with them. Even everyday people, not just celebs....people you work with, go to church with, etc. - have parts of them they would never show anybody else.

 

[Dmacky]

I think the journal is being dragged out time and time again because they literally have no other corroborating evidence.

Yes and it is driving me crazy!!! All the journals entries that ALV keeps refering to are AFTER they broke up and Hodi moved to Mesa to stalk TA. She keeps talking about their relationship. bla bla bla THEY WERE NOT IN A RELATIONSHIP :furious: Hodi was OBSESSED with Travis, plain and simple. None of this crap has anything to do with domestic abuse! They were not even a couple for goodness sake. TA was a young single man, and he wasn't doing anything different than other man was doing at his age. I just thank my lucky stars that we did not have FB, MS, text messges and phones that record and take pictures when I was in MY 20's. I did a lot of stupid things that I am NOT proud of. I would hate to see my past plastered all over the place.

 

[bsk]

I disagree. This woman knows what she's talking about. She's giving a lot of detail about the dynamics of an abusive relationship. I'm surprised this is not resonating with more women here. I'm thinking that women still can not recognize abuse which is why it is still so rampant.

But, like she says, the abuser masks the behavior until the relationship is somewhat established, then the victim, rather than recognizing a red flag, makes excuses for it, and the die is cast.

If one woman on the jury was in an abusive relationship, or witnessed one, they will know what she is talking about.

IMO

But won't some on the jury believe she is describing Jodi more than Travis?

 

[raisincharlie]

I gotta say....I've watched some REALLY EVIL people on trial over the years, but this has got to be the WORST.
How in the world can people throw away any common sense they possess for this cold blooded killer?


I spend quite a bit of time wondering how Nurmi and Wilmott can ever turn their back on their client. They know ever so much more about her than we do.

I could handle being around her as long as that stun belt is wrapped around whatever, but I would sure want the controller for it as well. Since you understand my twisted humor, you can imagine what would then take place...:floorlaugh:

 

[Nhic]

I disagree. This woman knows what she's talking about. She's giving a lot of detail about the dynamics of an abusive relationship. I'm surprised this is not resonating with more women here. I'm thinking that women still can not recognize abuse which is why it is still so rampant.

But, like she says, the abuser masks the behavior until the relationship is somewhat established, then the victim, rather than recognizing a red flag, makes excuses for it, and the die is cast.

If one woman on the jury was in an abusive relationship, or witnessed one, they will know what she is talking about.

IMO

The problem with ALV testibaloney is she demonizes men only. In her world, it is only men who are the abusers, never the women.

Of course in 2013 we know better. Women quite often abuse men, but ALV would have everyone believe that's rare. It isn't.

Another problem with ALV is that she has based her testibaloney on the lies told to her by JA.

She is absolutely uncredible and knows it by this stage of the game.

 

[GoodGurl]

What if - Jodi snuck into the house and Travis was asleep, she got on his computer to check some things out and maybe saw an email about the videos, maybe a link and on it went ? What if she went up to his bedroom and she was the one to have sex with him while he was asleep, as she accused him of doing to her ?

Given the defendent's nature, which has been well presented during this case, would this really be beyond her sneaking, evil ways ?

I honestly don't know what to think about this issue at all when considering Travis' email to her on 26 May 2008. By the same token, I put nothing past this evil thing.

ITA. She didn't recognize the car in the driveway (it was a rental), so you know she snuck in to see who was there. OR...got spooked, and didn't go in until she saw the car leave.

BTW, does anyone know if it's fact or rumor/gossip that the former roommate said he knew TA was awake doing a protection ritual? I have only heard bits about it, so guessing there's nothing factual to back it up?

 

[TotallyObsessed]

You probably could in a back alley or somewhere in Mexico.

I think the going rate for implants is definitely more than $3,000 (low end, saline not silicone). Silicone tends to be more expensive.

DD had saline approx. 6 years ago. At that time the going rate was $4,000

 

[KMouse]

Also, most of the men on the jury have probably treated a woman badly or they had friends who did not treat a woman the way they should. However, these men know that NOBODY deserves to die the way Travis died because a bootie call got upset when she was not treated better. :furious:

define "badly". ALV testilied about Travis having a history of treating women badly (or some other term). JW never asked what that meant. The word is subjective and depends on context.

Did he leave his socks on the floor?
Did he leave the toilet seat up?
Did he leave toast crumbs on the counter?

 

[SusieD]

I disagree. This woman knows what she's talking about. She's giving a lot of detail about the dynamics of an abusive relationship. I'm surprised this is not resonating with more women here. I'm thinking that women still can not recognize abuse which is why it is still so rampant.

But, like she says, the abuser masks the behavior until the relationship is somewhat established, then the victim, rather than recognizing a red flag, makes excuses for it, and the die is cast.

If one woman on the jury was in an abusive relationship, or witnessed one, they will know what she is talking about.

IMO

And if one woman on the jury has been abused there's no way she'd ever agree that a guy "not into you" is the same as having a fist hit your face. She'd know Jodi has never spent everyafternoon in true fear, wondering what the "crime" will be when he gets home tonight. She'd know Jodi never feared for her children or pets if she tried to leave. She'd know Jodi and these pathetic "expterts" were full of feces.

ALV may be able to describe a textbook abusive relationship,, but the problem, the HUGE problem is she doesn't know how to identify one. EVERY relationship is abusive according to her. And that makes her a sham.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I disagree. This woman knows what she's talking about. She's giving a lot of detail about the dynamics of an abusive relationship. I'm surprised this is not resonating with more women here. I'm thinking that women still can not recognize abuse which is why it is still so rampant.

But, like she says, the abuser masks the behavior until the relationship is somewhat established, then the victim, rather than recognizing a red flag, makes excuses for it, and the die is cast.

If one woman on the jury was in an abusive relationship, or witnessed one, they will know what she is talking about.

IMO

She knows what she is talking about when it comes to a genuinely abusive relationship, at least she did thirty years ago.

WHERE IS THE ABUSE IN THIS CASE?

Where is any evidence of a threat to Arias' life - either verbal or physical?

She can sit up there and dance with Wilmott, spinning and weaving the meaning of texts, emails and journals until the cows come home.

There is nothing that suggests Arias should have reason to fear for her life on June 4th!

 

[kscornfed]

I'm not sure. I do think JA is running the show and that may explain a LOT.
She wanted to represent herself and I think she still is. (sorta)

i think she's part of the team but i don't believe she's running things. her attorneys are looking for anything they can argue----like making a rope exist because fibers were found, even though there was no rope. they can say there was. all kinds of things like that they've zeroed in on.

their main objective is to take the spotlight OFF the crime, and put it ON travis, on words he used, things he did (according to JA and her phony journals and emails taken out of context). that's their goal---dirty up the victim and hope the jury buys their 'he was an abusive cheater so it's not so bad he's dead' story.

defense attorneys aren't the side looking for the truth in court. they are there to make the state prove its case, create arguments (even if they're lies----like TA owned a gun) to use against that case, and get an acquittal for their client.

 

[DebinGA]

Indeed. They believe that journal is evidence.
Everything they have, including their expert witnesses is just Jodi's lies.
Even when they try to put people on the stand as a witness (Lisa) she quickly turned into a prosecution witness.

ALV left off in the journal yesterday at Nov. 07 iirc. So far the journal "articles" have been recited as truth, but when we get to "pedo day" Jan. 21-22 all a sudden the absence of any mention of finding Travis pleasuring himself over a little boy's pic will somehow be cited as proof that it happened using the Law of Attraction schtick. Nothing in her journal/texts about finger-breaking either. Ditto no repeated, frantic calls from TA to JA as her journal contends. The hogwash ALV/JW fed the jury so far will pale in comparison to what's coming today and tomorrow, leaving jurors both disgusted and angry at the insult to their intelligence. moo

 

[bsk]

Forgetting for a moment the nature of the Q&A and so on, I wonder how JD will come across to the jurors. There are not a lot of senior citizens on the jury IIRC, and there is an impression that RS (certainly) and ALV (possibly) are stuck in 1980 to some extent. I expect JM will get JD to make the point that at least Samuels may have been great in his day, but that was a generation ago and he hasn't kept up to date. The same is true to some extent with ALV.

 

[shoregirl]

You don't have to read her book to leave a review. The review is of her professional testimony on the stand in this case.

I research the author before I buy a nonfiction book offering expertise. If I'm a battered woman looking for books to help me, I would want to know what kind of experience and world view the author has.

If the author was a 21 year old male with a BS in Psychology, I'm not interested in his books--he does not have the education or experience needed to be a professional in the field

This is the same thing. ALV is championing a woman who terrorized, stalked and murdered a man. She is demonizing a dead man by calling him a pedophile.

IF Dr. Samuels ever wrote a book, I also would not buy it based on his testimony championing a PEDOPHILE.

JMO

It bothered me from the beginning when she said she gave Jodi books and she a subscription. To a normal person it probably wouldn't be a big deal....I think Jodi used it to study, mimic and mold her defense to fit the characteristics of a domestic abuse victim. I can't help but think in the end it will be as simple as we all know it is. She couldn't have commited the crime in the way she says because of the pictures and there is no corrabarating evidence of domestic abuse...period. End of story.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I could handle being around her as long as that stun belt is wrapped around whatever, but I would sure want the controller for it as well. Since you understand my twisted humor, you can imagine what would then take place...:floorlaugh:

YOUR twisted humor?! I'm thinking stunbelt worn like a chastity belt. So apropos for JA.

 

[rose222]

That is a great question.

However, the way the average man's mind works is such that it would be difficult to pass up an opportunity for sex if the woman was making it hard (no pun intended) to say no thanks. It certainly seemed like TA was close to shutting her out on the sex front but may have succumbed to a biological urge.

Yes. He didn't shut her out of his life after those angry messages her sent her. He called her during her road trip even. He was too naïve. He never imagined that Arias could be capable of murder...not until he saw her with the gun and knife in her hand.