muddymcduck
Inactive
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2013
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 0
Now that I have exorcised my exasperation with Laviolette's behaviour, I can move on to Jodi.
Perhaps it is my relative inexperience in so closely following a criminal trial, but I am often left dumbfounded at how persistently Jodi prods Wilmott or whispers something to her during proceedings, seemingly making attempts at directing her own defense.
I can respect her right to a fair trial and I suppose that as a result of the defendant sitting directly adjacent to her counsel she might naturally feel compelled to intervene, but good grief, I couldn't imagine trying to adequately focus on proceedings with my client incessantly poking at me and hissing in my ear.
I did have to laugh then when I spotted what I could have sworn was Jodi suggesting to Wilmott that a Martinez question to Laviolette was argumentative, only to have Wilmott summarily dismiss her by saying that it wasn't. I haven't cared much for Wilmott's strategy, but I was glad to see her at least show a modicum of integrity in this instance.
See if I am interpreting things correctly. I believe it occurs around the 9:35 mark of the following video:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK-LOWBAy1g"]Jodi Arias Trial - Day 43 - Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]
Perhaps it is my relative inexperience in so closely following a criminal trial, but I am often left dumbfounded at how persistently Jodi prods Wilmott or whispers something to her during proceedings, seemingly making attempts at directing her own defense.
I can respect her right to a fair trial and I suppose that as a result of the defendant sitting directly adjacent to her counsel she might naturally feel compelled to intervene, but good grief, I couldn't imagine trying to adequately focus on proceedings with my client incessantly poking at me and hissing in my ear.
I did have to laugh then when I spotted what I could have sworn was Jodi suggesting to Wilmott that a Martinez question to Laviolette was argumentative, only to have Wilmott summarily dismiss her by saying that it wasn't. I haven't cared much for Wilmott's strategy, but I was glad to see her at least show a modicum of integrity in this instance.
See if I am interpreting things correctly. I believe it occurs around the 9:35 mark of the following video:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK-LOWBAy1g"]Jodi Arias Trial - Day 43 - Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]