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

[MeeBee]

I hope so. WTH did she think she was doing????

I think the judge may have been warning the DT to tell their witness not to act hostile or she will be forced to hold her in contempt. Who does she think she is asking him to talk to her in her own tone, like he's a child? Talk about condescending. She should not be allowed to do that. I also think it was her friends that burst out laughing when she asked if Martinez if he was mad at her. They simply cannot do that.

 

[Sleuth5]

OT


I hear The Monkees.

I'm old.

Oh, for heaven's sake you are not. I Luuuurve that song! :rocker:

 

[RaineInMD]

I don't see how you can look at only someone's texts, emails, and other writings and think you know everything about them, especially people you never met. I don't get your logic molly.

I don't see how you think how ALV can know better than the person writing the emails and texts what their feelings were when writing it and what they meant. Lisa has already said Travis was great to her, but ALV was able to ascertain that he abused her based on an out of context email she sent in the heat of the moment.

You can see why basing all your opinions on these written conversations alone can be a dangerous thing. ASSumptions.

This is what makes me absolutely crazy! Here we have a so called expert in DV but this expert does not interview anyone but Jodi! Why doesnt she interview the girlfriends first hand to find out EXACTLY what they meant by their texts/emails? She could interview friends, family and incorporate the emails/texts to get a complete and accurate picture - she would be more credible then. Instead her whole opinion is based solely on what Jodi said (liar) and text/emails of others. Obviously the truth is not the ultimate goal or else she would have tried to get the most accurate picture of the situation.

 

[Boytwnmom]

the courtroom. How many people has Mark put on death row? It's real easy to spout off on the Teevee about what you'd do differently but I don't think Mark, as nice as he seems, could do half the job Juan is doing and has done.

Mark is a lawyer who likes to be on the teevee. Juan is a dedicated prosecutor who isn't trying for media gigs. Juan has an amazing record. Mark is on lots of shows.

Mark on DD just said JM got lost in the weeds today and he needs to carefully craft his questions and be careful of just what he asks.....Go Mark, love that guy.

 

[TXHoney]

Never said he was if ya read my post....

Then why would you expect character witnesses to be produced for him? (Which, by the way, Mimi and Lisa both testified)

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

Texts that are occurring right now, as I type are in 'real time'. She is reading them as a text history. As they were written, in the past, back when they were written. Not in real time.

 

[McNEverest]

I don't see how you can look at only someone's texts, emails, and other writings and think you know everything about them, especially people you never met. I don't get your logic molly.

I don't see how you think how ALV can know better than the person writing the emails and texts what their feelings were when writing it and what they meant. Lisa has already said Travis was great to her, but ALV was able to ascertain that he abused her based on an out of context email she sent in the heat of the moment.

You can see why basing all your opinions on these written conversations alone can be a dangerous thing. ASSumptions.

:clap:
Good post ty ty!!
I would like to know how many hours of education urrr expertise ALV has in written anyalysis ?? And how that would relate to DV ??

hmm would love to know how ALV could answer what BIG BOLD LETTERS WITH EXCLAMATION POINTS written in an email/text mean :floorlaugh:
WHO would the perpetrator be in that situation?? :doh:

 

[Nhic]

Just going by what I heard, and not knowing the size of the courtroom, how far away from the jury she would have been if she had been where Travis' family is seated. From what I did see, she seemed to be near an exit?

MOO

One of the TH shows earlier said she was seated as far away from the jury as possible.

I know she has a right to be there, but fear this will give the DT another reason to move for a mistrial. A pro defense person was on here earlier and said #5 was there to make eyes at the jury (or something like that). When I read that a HUGE RED FLAG rose.

I think it's possible DT is not only reading here but posting :what:

 

[mck16]

Someone said earlier here that the Alexander family, friends and supporters along with media are on one side, the other side is for JA family so that's the only place #5 was able to sit. ??

The side JA's famiy sits on is the Public side. I have seen Dr. Drew's juror Katy, sitting on that side most of the time.

 

[kaRN]

The photo "tirade" predates the 100 names IM. She said that a phone conversation about his BOY LOVING (lol) sparked that May 26th IM.

Ok thanks :blushing: but....
There was no phone conversation though LOL!! JM spent hours showing JA the phone records. No phone calls. But then again ALV's entire version of the boy loving (must better descriptor than mastubatory event...thanks!) differed from JA's version. ALV had TA borrowing money from JA and the emails show JA begging him for some deposit and promising she'll make it up to him.

Such a tangled web these folks weave. Boiling frogs, Snow White oye!:banghead:

 

[Lorelilly]

Why hasn't JM brought in character witnesses to testify to TA character? Is he finished as far as his witnesses cause I think he could have brought in other's than what he has presented. Don't see any "new bomb shells" coming from JM..JMO

Juan has his Rebuttal witnesses to come. After the DT rests Juan will call people that can rebut what the Defense tried to prove in their case in chief. I anticipate the Defense will rest next week and then its GO TIME for Juan. And may the Force be with him.

 

[katydid23]

No. I do not believe any of that pedophile garbage.

And, although ALV mentions that she is aware of the story, she never gave any indication that she believed it, either.

But, I don't remember Jodi saying that is what that conversation was about. I thought we didn't know what it was about. [the one where he calls her a sociopath]
IMO

Let's clarify. If you think the pedophilia accusations are false, then how can you be 180 degrees now in this case?

Why would Jodi make up such a horrifying accusation if this was a real self defense case?

 

[Abe Froman]

Lets review shall we?

Jodi makes plans to go on a trip to see several people ending with seeing Ryan B, her "potential new love interest" in Utah. To prepare for this trip Jodi rents a car in another town 100 miles away even though there are car rental places in Yreaka. When offered a red car Jodi politely says thanks but no thanks I prefer one not so noticable. Jodi then travels on to see her ex Daryl B that she livedwith/dated for 6 years and that she dumped but still lived with to date Travis to "borrow" 2 5 gallon gas cans. She also just happens to give Daryl B something that required a remote which she left in the car because she forgot to give it to him, she turns around after leaving to do this. She travels on and buys another 5 gallon gas can in the same town she "gets her nails done". In that town some "skaters messed with her tag" as some funny prank or something? Although later on, days later, when her tag on the back of the car is upside down and she gets pulled over for it she blames it on those "skaters". She has not had a long phone call conversation with Travis except for him calling her twice on 6/2/08 at 3:04 am and 3:21 am. Jodi calls Travis on 6/3/08 at 12:37 pm, 1:51 pm, 8:16 pm and 8:34 pm......ALL of those calls are 2 mins or less. Jodi buys gas for her car and the THREE gas cans before leaving California to go to Mesa, AZ. Jodi turns OFF her cell phone before entering AZ. Jodi dyes her hair before going to Mesa, AZ. Jodi buys NO gas, food items or anything else while in AZ. Jodi kills Travis with a knife AND a 25 auto (the same caliber that just happens to have been stolen from her grandparents home) and tries to clean the crime scene some. Jodi then leaves AZ and still buys NO gas in AZ or any other items. On 6/4/08 at 11:37 pm Jodi calls Travis leaving a voice mail saying something inane about when he comes to visit her in Yreka even though she knows he is dead. Jodi arrives in Utah to visit with Ryan B 23 hours later than she was expected and blames it on getting lost. Jodi has fun, grinds on Ryan, goes about her life as if nothing was wrong. Jodi goes home, goes to work, talks to her family again going about her life as if nothing was wrong.

Then we have Jodi on the stand, during cross, talking about her time spent those 3 or 4 days. We have Jodi admit that her visit with Ryan B was AN ALIBI. I'll repeat that, Jodi says on the stand in front of the jury that her visit with Ryan B on 6/5/08 WAS AN ALIBI!!!

I really think that says it all when it comes to "self defense".

MOO

Summed up quite nicely, TorisMom!

 

[anagrammy]

No no no no no Molly..trust me she was not in an abusive relationship with Travis. She may have abused Travis but he did not abuse her. You don't have a relationship that lasts only a few months, and now you're back into the home of your grandparents with no worries and you chose to travel back and move in free with a girl 3 miles from him so you can stalk him.

If I could only tell you the Witnesses that were not allowed to speak about things she did and said because they are too prejudicial to her.

If anyone says he begged her to come back he made her come back, he had this hold on her. Wrong again, if that were true she would move back in with him in the house, not in a room 3 miles away.

That is called stalking.

There are plenty of truly abused women in the world who need our help and our sympathy. Jodi is not one of them.

Absolutely agree Steph -- I always love your posts.

I keep waiting for the domestic violence experts on this board to bring up what seems obvious to me. I was just a field social worker but plenty of my clients were victims of domestic violence and I did have training on the cycle of domestic violence.

We worked with the clients to make sure they understood a simplified seven-step cycle because the big problem was that they were the frogs in the water being boiled and had great difficulty IDENTIFYING a behavior as domestic violence. They didn't want to give it a chronic label, they wanted to consider it episodic or their fault (I provoked him) because they loved the perpetrator.

I would never expose a victim to the mishmash that LaViolette is putting out. If you define loving behavior that is in the respite stage as "abusive" would make it impossible to accurately label a behavior as beyond our boundary. The client would be asking themselves, "Was the latte-buying during a period of respite, a rebonding time (therefore abusive)?" or maybe "The latte was given during a normal period because it was 36 hours after he punched me..."

IMO it is a mass of confusion designed to give professionals the idea that they need an expensive book, workbook and seminar created by Alyce LaViolette.

The cycle of violence is NOT complicated and teaches a simple principle that ALV never mentioned in all those days on the stand. It is up to each person to decide where to draw the line on violence. You can draw it before or after verbal abuse. If you decide you are willing to tolerate emotional abuse, you see on the cycle that it can escalate to physical abuse.

Everyone's different. When I experienced domestic violence as a teenage bride, I didn't know that I was willing to tolerate verbal abuse and shoving but not hitting. Today's women can consciously choose where to draw the line for their own protection and that of their children.

IMO, ALV clouds the important issues that victims need to recognize in order to enlarge her own importance. It may even be subconscious, but I think her refusal to embrace technology as IMPORTANT in helping her clients recognize abuse (via texing, electronic stalking, etc) is a huge red flag that she is not really into it "to help people."

 

[Melanie]

She said that JA told her that the email tirade was precipitated by JA forgetting a photo at his house. :floorlaugh:

And her passport, and her plants...OFGS.....

:what:

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

I swear to all that if I ever win the Powerball I will promise publicly to split it 50/50 with the person or persons who produce the genuine gun that JA disposed of. That and any of the clothes she trashed, the knife.... I'd be glad to give up the cash just to have some of that stuff produced. Scott Peterson never imagined that his victims would appear to seal his fate. The Universe made sure it happened. I pray that the same happens to JA.

 

[Boytwnmom]

which meshes nicely with her propensity for fairy tale beliefs. She's not a PHD, can't test or interpret tests and her "diagnosis" of Jodi as "abuse victim" and Travis as "abuser" is not from real science, i.e. DSM. This is all a malleable
construct which depends in large part on the integrity of the information being provided. No integrity, no abuse "diagnosis", just a "fairy tale".

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.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

Total disagreement. She wouldn't even answer, "When you interview someone, are you talking? Yes or no?"

She's acting like everything is a trick question, she's way too defensive. Can't stand her. Samuels wasn't even this bad. Just answer the question as he asked, and if you want to add something, you'll get a chance on redirect. She's done this before. I swear, both her and Samuels acted like they've never been cross-examined. She's a fraud and she sucks the big one.

:twocents:

 

[kaRN]

One of the TH shows earlier said she was seated as far away from the jury as possible.

I know she has a right to be there, but fear this will give the DT another reason to move for a mistrial. A pro defense person was on here earlier and said #5 was there to make eyes at the jury (or something like that). When I read that a HUGE RED FLAG rose.

I think it's possible DT is not only reading here but posting :what:

Serenity now Nhic, serenity now. People say lots of things they can't link to and make claims they have no way of substantiating. This too shall pass!!

 

[TXHoney]

She was reading all the text messages back and forth.

Text messages are real time.

She was reading all the emails back and forth.

It's a brave new world

IMO

Molly, it IS a brave new world, and one that ALV has not bothered to join. Anyone living with today's technology understands that you can't always read emotion or nuances in the flat medium of IMs, texts and emails. Very innocent words can be made to sound horrendous, depending on who is reading them and with what intent.