trial day 41: the defense continues its case in chief #122

[nightwatch]

JVM implies that there might be concern that ALV is more elderly or something about gender, and asks whether Juan should go easy on her. That is insulting implying people of certain age or gender are fragile.

jvm is like a carnival barker. alv was cashing state checks and she dragged ta down main street for several days. can't pull the be kind to the old lady card. :moo:

 

[StephanieHartPI]

i kinda see though why the witnesses get all pissed, the way juan asks questions that would require a yes or no would be damaging, so unless a witness elaborates, their answers will be taken in a negative way. i in no way think this is unfair or anything, especially seeing the stunts the defense team has pulled. but i do understand why they get pissed off. it's not 100% of the time, sometimes they are being evasive and untruthful.

it's like saying 'i ate the whole cake because i was hungry', and juan would say 'did you eat the whole cake?' and you would answer yes, but that would make you look like a pig lol.

Yes, it's definitely a "tactic" a way to question and the Defense should be note taking, to come back on re-cross and allow them to elaborate on a few of those.
(reminds me of how my dad used to ask me questions actually...and yes, he was an Attorney lol)

"ALV, Mr Martinez asked you if you had eaten one of every pastry in the entire bakery and you said yes didn't you?"

ALV: "yes I did"

"How long did it take you to eat all that Pastry?"

ALV: "two years"

 

[coeurfragile]

I dunno ... I'm much more concerned about Cinderella.

But remember we can't bring in the abuse that Cinderella suffered as a child! Do you know the nature of the intimate relationship between Cinderella and Prince Charming? Have you interviewed these characters yourself AZWatcher?! :floorlaugh:

 

[Wishbone]

Oh I would count on that. I worked for Disney for years. They
Go after everyone. I mean everyone.

The trademark doesn't include fiction and non fiction books.

 

[livelife]

I was a little confused about the snow white stuff at first but after watching it again I am feeling better about where he might be going

 

[Karmady]

Wow. Now THAT was somethin'! No one, not anyone ever, will be able to out-cocktail- party/war-story anyone on either side of that...never. omg

 

[Moe]

Ha Jodi is a "Beauty School Dropout" lol
on Dr Drew... she gets an "F" for her hair do!

beauty school drop out grease - YouTube

No more vacation days for you...

 

[katydid23]

i could be totally wrong because I'm no lawyer and am not legally savvy, and maybe it is really awesome strategy that I cannot see, but I kinda feel like the Snow White thing was overplayed.

He started off with the Snow White thing for three main reasons.

Number one, he was nearly out of time, and did not want to reveal any of his important line of questioning that is upcoming. He does not want them to prepare for anything this weekend.

Two, he wanted to spar with her to see how she does and to isolate her manner of defending herself. He got the chance to see her strategy--How she comments things like " are you mad at me Mr Martinez?" It was great that he got her to use that already---Before he really got into the meat of his cross.

And three, he was making an important point about her continuum, that it was based upon a myth. That she never met or interviewed Travis and yet she has placed him upon her continuum of abuse.

 

[molly333]

ALV has totally turned my view of this case 180 degrees. I'm not sure what the Jury is doing with her testimony, but if there is one woman who is familiar with domestic abuse on the panel, they are looking at a hung jury. More than one--murder two or less. And, JM isn't doing the prosecution any favors by using his one speed fits all on her--he is just looking boorish and annoying.

IMO

 

[lil_buddy]

so for anyone who has watched this talk ALV gave...
How was Snow White battered? She doesn't talk about SW at all in the talk? She just uses her in the title?
(I don't wanna watch it myself, but will if i have to maybe)

 

[Venom]

I just watched a 10 minute video of JM crossing ALV. They way that ALV was smirking and laughing towards the defense team over the Snow White questions makes me want to smack her (heck, the whole defense) with a wooden spoon.
I think we need a wooden spoon smacking smiley.

 

[jellybeanz]

but remember we can't bring in the abuse that cinderella suffered as a child! Do you know the nature of the intimate relationship between cinderella and prince charming? Have you interviewed these characters yourself azwatcher?! :floorlaugh:

pmsl.............

 

[gngr~snap]

We can discuss her book in such a way as it is relevant to her testimony...we just can't go out of our way to ruin the woman, like leaving nasty reviews of a book we've never read. And to be fair to her co-author, Ola Barnett, who isn't testifying for the defense - the book is indeed a collaborative effort.

I haven't read it but I did read the Snow White portion (page 71). (Personally I prefer Patricia Evans, Beverly Engel, Lundy Bancroft, and Gavin de Becker but that's rather another topic.)

Anyway, her basic premise is that abuse victims are naive, gullible, compassionate, sweet, passive and 'exceedingly helpless' - like Snow White - but they are compelled when leaving, or attempting to leave, abusive situations to become the Wicked Witch. Further, her compassion and empathy disempower her. She's requested to change into a character she's never liked. The witch is described as controlling, assertive, calculating and strong, et al.

As a survivor I personally feel this is incredibly simplistic and really grossly inadequate. In fact, its kind of written from the perspective of someone who knows 'about' abuse but hasn't actually lived it. I don't know what her history is. When leaving, a victim does have to become assertive but where this is a scary and daunting perspective, I don't believe its akin to becoming a calculating witch for survivors. It's terrifying because we're on our own after being told for too long we'd never survive it.

And it kind of altogether ignores the psychological abuse and manipulation abusers utilize specifically to prey on a victim's compassion and empathy while simultaneously instilling doubt they could survive on their own - all solely to keep them in the relationship. I just can't find how her version is even remotely relative to intimate partner violence or what path she took to get to her conclusion.

IMO she views women like this.

At least women who have relationships with "mad men"

I never felt like "bait".

 

[amberjul]

I dunno about any of you, but I think I'll watch Snow White tonight.

 

[Venom]

I am no attorney. But, I don't find her likable AT ALL. In fact I find her shady and aloof. And not very bright at all. Often sitting with her mouth agape, looking lost.

Her smirking and smiling about the snow white questions while looking at the defense table burned me. I don't like her either. As my husband would say, someone's got the man hate on.

 

[panthera]

But remember we can't bring in the abuse that Cinderella suffered as a child! Do you know the nature of the intimate relationship between Cinderella and Prince Charming? Have you interviewed these characters yourself AZWatcher?! :floorlaugh:

OMG!

:silly:

Watching the cross-examination...what happened to the DT & JA today that they are not color-coordinated???

 

[Thurston]

Doesn't the judge have the authority over witnesses? Regardless of how the defense is "coaching" their witnesses - couldn't the judge say, "This will not be tolerated in my court. Ms. LaViolette, you assert that you are a professional - therefore you should know better than to pose questions to the state. The court has accommodated you when you fell ill suddenly and when you announced on the stand that you had to go to the restroom - does the court need to be made aware of any ailment that you have which renders you unable to follow reasonable court decorum? I believe that you know better than to ask the state questions."

It seems as though the judge should be able to "control" the witnesses. Or at least tell the defense that if they do not control their witness - that she will be forced to do it, and, they (the defense) wants to avoid that.

The judge should have "excused" the people in the courtroom laughing, I agree - especially the "workers."

pufnstuf
"Yes, she's emotionally disturbed. She's unbalanced!"

BBM. Because the defense team has told them to respond that way, to typecast Juan as "the angry prosecutor." It's a common theme throughout the trial because the defense team is coaching the witnesses to respond that way.


Clancey
I agree. And all the ' laughers'? They should have been shown the exit.

Thurston
Why was LaViolette allowed to say to Juan Martinez, "Mr. Martinez are you angry with me?"

There is common theme with the Defense Expert Witnesses - all of them are rude and disrespectful to the court.

Doesn't the Judge have the authority to tell a witness: Do not ask the prosecution questions. You are not really concerned - nor do you really believe that Mr. Martinez is angry with you. By asking this question you a making a mockery out of this court - and it will not be tolerated. Now, are you able to conduct yourself in a professional manner and answer the state's questions? You did not have a problem answering the questions asked of you by the defense. Ms. LaViolette, this is your warning. Ms. LaViolette, this is The Court telling you that you are out of line."

It is very irritating that a witness would behave this way - and I have never witnessed such poor behavior by witnesses.

BBM. Because the defense team has told them to respond that way, to typecast Juan as "the angry prosecutor." It's a common theme throughout the trial because the defense team is coaching the witnesses to respond that way.


Clancey
I agree. And all the ' laughers'? They should have been shown the exit.

 

[Krisy]

Could leave home early, as a child, due to abuse...

YET then we're expected to believe she couldn't walk away from Travis, as an adult??

 

[QueenD]

He started off with the Snow White thing for three main reasons.

Number one, he was nearly out of time, and did not want to reveal any of his important line of questioning that is upcoming. He does not want them to prepare for anything this weekend.

Two, he wanted to spar with her to see how she does and to isolate her manner of defending herself. He got the chance to see her strategy--How she comments things like " are you mad at me Mr Martinez?" It was great that he got her to use that already---Before he really got into the meat of his cross.

And three, he was making an important point about her continuum, that it was based upon a myth. That she never met or interviewed Travis and yet she has placed him upon her continuum of abuse.

This is what I got from it too. Perfect, thanks for posting.

Going to bed, lovely ending for the week for me.

See everyone Monday!

 

[Paintr]

She is not and has not been likeable. Unless you think a paid
liar, who trashes a vistim is likeable.

This woman was looking for abuse in every written or spoken word from JA. She found it even if she had to twist and turn and squint to do it. She had one purpose ....to paint TA as dark as possible and was well paid to accomplish her purpose. She has never been an impartial expert. There is nothing likable about a 'hired gun' with an agenda.

If she honestly, truly believes every thing JA and the DT has told her without even considering any other alternative or doing further research, that is failing to do the job she says she has spent her life doing. Nothing likable in that either.

I have no idea if she is a nice woman in her personal life and I don't care. I care only about her professional connection to this case.