trial day 43: the defense continues its case in chief #131

[BritsKate]

I am no expert on DV, but something ALV discussed at one point on direct got me thinking. She testified about how in the DV "world" experts are beginning to expand their definition of DV to include more non-physical "attacks" such as verbal and psychological or emotional abuse. IMO she testified about this to cover the bases in case the jury decides to throw out JA's claims of physical abuse because of no corroborating evidence - then ALV can still fall back on the alleged non-physical abuse by TA and still try to claim JA was a DV victim.
My thought on this is that if ALV (and other DV experts) are widening the definition of DV to include non-physical behaviors, then it would surely follow that the stats on male-on-female and female-on-male DV would dramatically change. IMO in general (not in all individual cases) males and females express control and anger and fear in different ways; males stereotypically are more physical and females stereotypically tend towards passive aggressive behaviors (crying, withdrawing/withholding, manipulating etc. - sound familiar, JA?!).
So, if current DV stats (which are probably based on studies from more than 2 years ago anyway) are reporting DV stats based on physical abuse then it would follow that of course male-on-female rates are higher (this doesn't even take into account the factor that men who are abused physically by a woman likely have a lower rate of reporting it due to societal pressures). IIRC ALV on direct claimed that non-physical abuse can be "more damaging" than physical (again, she wanted to be sure that if the jury rejects JA's claims of physical abuse, they might still consider the "more damaging" non-physical abuse and put JA in the DV victim category anyway). Since women in general (IMO) tend towards more non-physical tactics, if studies start including non-physical abuse in their stats then it seems there would be a sharp rise in the rate of DV of the women-on-men type.
Didn't realize I was rambling on so long.... my apologies!

I'm not an expert either but there's been a shift in domestic violence since at least 1995 to attempt to define and highlight psychological abuse. Patricia Evans wrote 'The Verbally Abusive Relationship' in 1996, for example.

It's hardly a new concept, at any rate, and in my experience 'most' people realize psychological abuse alone can be every bit as destructive and debilitating as physical abuse. Physical abuse almost never exists without concurrent psychological abuse too. Ironically, most of the misconceptions of abuse I've seen are in the family law environment - and peeps (very understandably) not comprehending why victims stay, a victim's 'profile', and things of that nature.

In terms of statistics the problem really is that so many victims don't come forth. Psychologically abused victims can't really come forward - unless the abuse escalates to a reportable crime. Very often though, by the time it gets there, victims are often so terrified of their abuser and so enmeshed within the abuse, they won't report it. This is by no means relegated to psychological abuse alone, either, its a pervasive problem of abuse itself.

I personally believe, because of how abuse evolves, the true statistic of those in abusive relationships is just not quantifiable.

All MOO

 

[ynotdivein]

She doesn't have to "get her wits together" if she just answers the question and tells the truth. She is clearly trying to create a combative answer to his questions, something that will be defensive and protect her client. <respectful snip for focus>

ITA--and she is trying to think three steps ahead of him before she answers. She said as much at least twice yesterday that I heard. Once she was so flustered that the actual words that came out of her mouth were, "(sidestep sidestep blather)... I don't know where you go with this."

The other time she was more articulate in expressing the same sentiment. This horse won't even be led to water!

 

[Hopeful One]

Yes

I thanked your post and it didn't show up until I refreshed the page.

Mine don't show up AFTER I've refreshed the page though. They show up when I thank but then they're gone when I refresh. Not always. Odd. Very odd.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Here's a question! What will JA's reaction be to the first-degree murder verdict?

1. Hurl insults at the jury
2. Slap Willmott
3. Fake faint
4. Fake cry/howl
5. Show no emotion

BBM: Whatever her reaction is, I hope it "sets off" her new "stun belt" that she is wearing around her waist now !

:great: :seeya:

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

It seems to me that JW is very wet behind the ears. She does not appear to have tried many cases. Is she a DP qualified defense lawyer or just Nurmi? Anyway, Jodi's constant whispering in JW's ear while she is the lawyer responsible for objections is extremely distracting. I would never allow a client to do that. That's what paper and pen(cils) are for.

I hope you're sitting down before reading this:

JW IS the DP qualified atty, not Nurmi
:what:

 

[Snoods]

What about when Juan said to AVL "Don't look at the defense table look at me, I'm asking the questions!" Go Juan!!!

 

[Puzzler]

She said 'murder' and she has said it more than once.

The truth slipped in among her combativeness.

IMO

Agreed. When I heard ALV call it the "murder," she immediately backtracked and rephrased it as the "killing." Too late to shut that barn door though. I don't think JA was too happy with her expert yesterday. I saw JA take a long drink (right-handed) and then slam the cup down with a peeved expression on her face. It was a lovely sight to see. (I haven't hunted down the clip, sorry.)

 

[STEADFAST]

The 'time out' insult was the camel's straw, no question. However, there was one other huge (imo) gaffe. When she and Juan were sparring over JA's 'need to feel normal' when she visited Ryan Burns hours after slaughtering Travis, ALV grinned and said: "If it had been me, I would have tried to feel normal, too....after such an event." I literally fell out of my chair!

I had to miss most of yesterday's testimony. That is appalling!!!
:furious:

There are no words low enough . . . ullhair:

 

[laniefi]

I think this shows she came in with bias - against men and against the death penalty. Those diaries were nothing more than another piece of 'collateral' evidence, and if she were an unbiased professional she would have seen them as same.

No earthly reason to apologise to your case study. IMO

I wondered if ALV used the apology as a way at getting JA to be 100% honest and open....then, I remembered who we were talking about! :facepalm:

 

[G&AMom]

I couldn't agree more, scorpio. I took her testimony to mean because Travis didn't react from a place of fear according to her interpretation (I'm going to assume restraining order, new locks, police intervention, etc.) that means there's no evidence of stalking...which is about as backwards an approach as you can get. By that reasoning every female that returns to a male abuser obviously couldn't possibly fear him either.

Stalking is just one manifestation of psychological abuse. Abuse is determined by a series of behaviors on the part of the abuser intended to subjugate another using those behaviors. It has never been defined by the actions or reactions of the victim - not since, maybe, 1928 or so.

To answer your question though, both Lisa and Mimi have mentioned stalking prior to Jodi's testimony. It was at Lisa's house Travis' tires were slashed. We haven't heard from friends yet who have said online that Travis feared her - I think his own words carry a great deal of weight though.

Jodi was pretty, um, blatant in showing a pattern of obsessive and unreasonable behavior all her own with her testimony imo. One of the jury questions was specifically about Jodi being controlling and I believe that's immensely important. She discounted it, of course, and stated she's too forgiving and acquiescent. I think the jury see right through her and her 'experts'.

JMO

If not showing a reaction of fear mean there's no stalking, doesn't that also mean that a woman who doesn't take her broken collar bone to the emergency room wasn't beaten by her violent partner?

 

[TigerBalm]

:welcome4: boonedock and Gigi, so glad you joined us!!

 

[Hopeful One]

Just watch Jodi, no emotion, no anything. It is like she is watching the trial of someone else.
Notice that> I would be screaming and crying my eyes out that I was innocent.

That bothers me SO MUCH. She doesn't even care that Travis is dead. I want her to at least be sorry, at least be tortured over the beautiful life that she took.

But she's not. I think she takes each day as a new day. She likes that all of this attention is on her right now.

 

[hindsight2020]

Here's a question! What will JA's reaction be to the first-degree murder verdict?

1. Hurl insults at the jury
2. Slap Willmott
3. Fake faint
4. Fake cry/howl
5. Show no emotion

5. Show no emotion, she is already working on her DP appeals

 

[laniefi]

I had to miss most of yesterday's testimony. That is appalling!!!
:furious:

There are no words low enough . . . ullhair:

She just can't STAND the fact that JM, a man, is in charge of the line of questioning. She just made herself look even more unprofessional and biased - if that was even possible!

 

[minazoe]

First....Good morning all you wonderful WSers! :seeya:

ALV is a shill. I agree with you minazoe, that she's being paid to turn Arias into the victim. I don't buy that she actually believes what she's being paid to say. And that makes her even more of a sellout. Can you imagine how many DV experts that had to go through before they finally found one who would lie on the stand like that?

I do think she was charmed by JA, though. And she can't stand being challenged by JM..that is VERY obvious! It's a pleasure to watch, though.

A high profile DP case against a somewhat attractive female with big *advertiser censored*...at $250.00 dollars an hour is a wet dream for someone like ALV...it is a ticket to more trials for more money all over the country if Jodi gets life.

this is her big chance....sadly we see right through it...it's like when you tell your boss you will go into some terrible situation and do the best you can, barring outright lying to a client or whoever....

it's that lame. there's no way.

 

[SCSam]

I hope you're sitting down before reading this:

JW IS the DP qualified atty, not Nurmi
:what:

Now THERE'S another scary thought!

 

[kscornfed]

is there court tomorrow? i know she added friday morning.

 

[Nosey Parker]

4 years behind bars she has settled in nicely. That's actually a long time? We might not think that, but think about where we were in June of 2008. I had both my parents here, I was working a few days in Seal Beach, the rest of the week here.

Fast forward to April 2013. I have a completely different life...both parents died within weeks of each other in Oct and Dec 2008 for the most part, very unexpected. I ended up giving up that position at work because I was here caring for them at the end. And now it taken me into a completely new line of work. Albeit one I was doing somewhat all along in my line of work, but I have a completely different life.

Her 4 years would have her settled in nicely and the American Idol star no less and she is used to cheese sandwiches and showering once a week and she has become quite the pencil and pen thief.

My condolences on the loss of your parents, Stephanie. :hug:

 

[fifteen89]

She doesn't have to "get her wits together" if she just answers the question and tells the truth. She is clearly trying to create a combative answer to his questions, something that will be defensive and protect her client. She can't just answer the question, she has to reform her answers to be positive to her client even though the truth might reflect negatively on Jodi. That is what is so tiring for her and it shows. Just answer the question to the best of your ability without analyzing it's affects on the defense.

ALV is suppose to be an objective evaluation expert and she is proving to be an advocate for the defendant. With a jury that consists of a majority of men she is not coming off as a strong witness for defense.

OMG. Just imagine how much further along we would be if ALV would just answer questions with the requested yes or no. We'd probably be through juror questions by now, not still in cross. I guess it's too much to ask for the Judge to tell her that before she answers every single question.

 

[Hopeful One]

Did you all see Smooth Operator's post from last night (or early this morning) about the physical transformation of JA's face over the course of this trial? She was spot on and it was something I've noticed as well.

I hope some of our great computer geniuses are able to do a video morph or photo side-by-sides so we can see it all in one spot.

Her face truly has changed. It's bizarre. Like the evil is really coming out and showing for all to see.