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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
ITA. Cindy Anthony was truthful in her 911 calls. After that she went off the rails, but she was truthful in those calls. George Anthony was truthful for much longer, and gave agonizing testimony against his daughter in front of a Grand Jury. Both of them jumped on the FCA bandwagon at some point, but they were truthful at the beginning when everything hit the fan.

I think JA's parents are no different in that respect. It took them a bit of time to circle the wagons, but I think those LE interviews (from the little we've seen) are truthful.

I am disgusted at this expert and how little she went "outside the box" with her so called investigation. This defendant is a proven liar. Wouldn't you think she would at least interview other people close to the defendant to corraborate her story? Uhm, past boyfriends would be a good place to start? And TA's other lady friends? Her testimony is not at all credible to me given that it's based on the writings of, and interviews with, a lying liar.

It appears the difference is that ALV could have read statements that were elicited from defense when they interviewed the parents. Whereas ALV never heard the police interviews of the parents. And she still has not heard the mother's interview. I think if ALV does not admit she didn't do a proper study we could see the mother's interview which is far more damning to Jodi than the father.
 
I'm beginning to think Juan wrote the Webster dictionary :)

I am convinced she has been watching the trial....I think she slipped here, and tried to catch herself....she knew about Samuel's testimony.
 
ALV doesn't think MM and Jodi were broken up yet, but then right after calls Bianca his gf. Which is it that ALV believes? Also, she doesn't think showing up didn't freak Bianca out because Jodi says she wasn't confrontational.
Hi
Didn't JA testify that the boy who told her the room number, purposely told her the wrong room number so he could go warn Bianca? Why would he need to warn her if JA was just there to have tea with her??lol
 
I take back everything I said about JM .. He rocked today. His demeanor was such that I paid closer attention to what awesome points he made versus how he was making them. He really showed how smooth he could be to bring out the ugly snake of the defense witness.
 
I think he can have it both ways.

She did not write about the DV and the Pedophilia because it didn't happen. And he has other corroboration for the fact that it never happened. [ work schedules/texts/ no pictures, med reports/no injuries]

AND, at the same time, she never wrote about being jealous because she did not want evidence of her jealousy in writing.

The reason he asked the DV expert about the 'secret law of attraction' is specific to the DV expert herself. SHE IS THE ONE that used that law of attraction as an excuse for JA not writing about those negatve things. So he turned it around on her and said" you are saying she was not jealous because you never saw anything like that in her words---but if you think she followed the law of attraction, then she would not have done so,correct?'

So I think the jury can follow his train of thought. JMO

I agree, Also, speaks to JM point that rather than ALV 'believing JA is leaving out negative stuff b/c IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, and further questioning/pushing her on this; she chooses to believe JA when she says the reason of law of attraction and leaves it at that.
She never seems to push back against anything Jodi says to try and 'get at the truth', or even 'more details'.
The impression it gives me is her assessments is based on the assumption that 'everything JA says is true' and all contrary info should be discredited. Kind of hard to discredit information when you never speak to the actual sources involved...
 
I wonder if there is any impropriety in DT not providing their expert witness with so many things that seem necessary for her to do the job she was hired to do?
 
Well, if I were on the jury, I would ask AL to explain to me how JA was defending herself from abuse from Travis by stabbing him in the back.

Maybe there's a Juror Question along those exact lines...Doh!
 
We are upstairs. However, there is a basement and a parking lot to this place.:wink:
 
I hope Juan starts tomorrow of with

stalk
verb
Definition of STALK
intransitive verb
1
: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
2
: to walk stiffly or haughtily
transitive verb
1
: to pursue by stalking
2
: to go through (an area) in search of prey or quarry <stalk the woods for deer>
3
: to pursue obsessively and to the point of harassment
— stalk·er noun
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stalk
 
Wow, posting have almost come to a screeching halt....

I have those special- issued Stephen Colbert 3d glasses (came with his book)... Wonder if they make watching the defense portion of the trial more tolerable? Maybe I'll try tomorrow...
 
Ooooh, I'm totally going to steal Mark's "strike that".!! I called it first!!!
 
Old school domestic violence 101 used to preach that anger is the reason for abuse. And LaViolette is a strong proponent for court-ordered anger management as a solution, in part, to domestic violence.

I see abuse as entirely about control with anger being one of many manifestations utilized to establish and maintain control. I am against court-ordered anger management therapies because I believe they have the ability to teach an abuser to adapt and be more covert. Especially true with psychopathic abusers. (Research shows a moderate success rate looking purely at recidivism in arrests. Victims have a much different opinion according to a lot of the same research.)

It seems to me and my 'untrained brain' that LaViolette is using an antiquated notion of the causation of domestic violence itself. Travis expresses anger openly while Jodi is more subtly (raging) passive-aggressive among a whole list of other emotional manipulators very often used by abusers to control their victims. If I were only looking for anger...apart from the crime itself, and precluded any other manifestation as evidence of an abusive relationship, I'm not certain I'd see her as an abuser either.

I'm not defending LaViolette as I do honestly believe she's dangerous in her own way. I think it just hit me why I see black where she sees white and vice versa. The past few decades of research flies in the face of her testimony regardless.

MOO

Your "untrained brain" is a match for hers any day.
 
Today, IMO, was the only day JM used the defendant's name. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
I love Mark Eiglarsh, I really do BUT...If I hear one more time that he says that JM is not getting to the point fast enuf, I might call HLN myself. Does he not see that if she would answer his questions...off the bat!...that this wouldn't take so long and JM COULD get to his point quicker...sheesh is Mark watching the same trial I am????
 
Anyone have the final part of today's testimony (after the afternoon break)? I can't seem to locate it anywhere.

Here you go. :)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK-LOWBAy1g"]Jodi Arias Trial - Day 43 - Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]



.
 
Good question by Lonnie if you're watching Dr D. Does anyone have the exact quote? Something about any piece of evidence changing your mind????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
180
Total visitors
252

Forum statistics

Threads
609,398
Messages
18,253,643
Members
234,649
Latest member
sharag
Back
Top