trial day 44: the defense continues its case in chief #134

[TXHoney]

Grrrr, from Jodi's art site:

“Some people say they have no regrets; I cannot count myself among them. When I step back and look at ‘Hourless,’ the concept of time running forward and backward is evoked. Rather than focus on all that I could and would do differently if I could hop a train to the past, I remember the lessons and carry what I’ve learned into the future.” -Jodi Arias

 

[Brooke]

You know, if it weren't for y'all's witty and incisive comments, my monitor would have been thrown out the window months ago. There is no way I could watch this crapola by myself. My husband is a retired USMC Gunnery Sgt and even he has been surprised by some of the colorful comments I've issued at the monitor. It's especially great to have first-hand commentary straight from the courtroom but I consider that a bonus. There are so many kindred souls gathered here, that's what's important. We crave justice for Travis Alexander and we hate lies and deceit.

I don't have cable so I watch via livestream, sometimes muted when the defense team is up. No way I can watch and keep up with the threads, so I'm chronically behind the "real time" conversations here. It might be tempting to skip ahead, and I have on occasion, but when I do I find I miss some very insightful comments. So I leave threads up and open and read through them as I can, as time permits. Sometimes I'm sure it looks like I don't ever sleep because my name is showing as 'present' at the bottom of the thread 24 hours a day.

I don't think this jury is dumb, don't think this jury is easily manipulated by lies, and I don't think this jury likes being lied to for as long as they have been. I can say that with a good deal of confidence because we do have courtroom observers, not only our observers but others who tweet and report. Honest reporters like Beth K who are there to actually report, not create news for ratings like Jean C and JVM. We get a feel for the jury by the questions they ask, and there haven't been any that have raised real concern for me.

The likes of Richard Samuels and Alyce LaViolette, Kirk Nurmi, Jennifer Wilmott - these <unusual people> have had their day. They have exposed themselves for the world to see who and what they are and they will have to go back and try and pick up the pieces of whatever career or life they have once this trial is over. The light has shined on them, exposing them. That's good. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. As it should be.

All of that to say this: I am very happy to be a part of this group. We are kindred souls, outraged by the crime itself and outraged by the lies and obfuscation by both the defendant and her defense team. Our hearts go out to Travis' family. We are encouraged by Juan Martinez, we want to see truth prevail, want to see Travis' good name restored, want his family to see justice on his behalf, want to see his murderer punished appropriately for the crime she committed. And I believe we will. I really do believe that.

Prayers for Travis' family and friends continue. Lord, please let the light shine on the truth and let justice prevail.


:grouphug:

 

[seguek9]

Here is another great when you guys have got to see! It is by that Mikee Daniels guy, I thought when I saw it must be Steely Dan!http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=0gcrnKD2UAk&desktop_uri=/watch?v=0gcrnKD2UAk

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

I love mikee kung pau:floorlaugh:

 

[VALee]

Wow...I didn't realize how flexible Arias was.

The pic on the top left with red shirt.

:what:

She's holding a child upside down, the leg you see is the child's

 

[websurfer]

:rocker::great:

ready to watch more trial....
Juan shoulda been a dentist:
Pulling teeth....:banghead:

 

[Anbud]

chijojo I'm so sorry for your lost. hugs and warms caring thoughts send your way . hugs .

 

[G&AMom]

I'm brand new here but have lurked for a long time. I've learned so much from the legal experts and the keen-eyed observers in the JA trial threads. Thanks to all of you!

As a psychologist, I've watched in horror as two of the worst examples of "experts" from my profession have done everything possible to undermine the credibility of the field in front of a national audience. Of course there is always some subjectivity associated with the analysis of human behavior, but adherence to scientific principles can produce reliable and verifiable results. Unfortunately, charlatans can use the language of the field to lend false credibility to almost any opinion.

I'm hesitant to question JM's judgment on any aspect of his cross examination, partly because I thought he was amazing (no notes!?!) but also because I would never want to incur the wrath of his fans here. I am new, after all. Still, he could have hammered ALV on her lack of scientific rigor, especially her repeated assertions that she was able to do all of the diagnostic work "in her brain". An absence of written work to explain in detail how her decision was reached is a huge red flag.

Also, the definition of "stalking" doesn't require the victim to respond in any particular way. Here's the American Psychological Association's description:

"Stalking refers to repeated harassing or threatening behaviors that an individual engages in such as following a person, appearing at a person&#8217;s home or place of business, making harassing phone calls, leaving written messages or objects, or vandalizing a person&#8217;s property. These actions may be accompanied by a credible threat of serious harm, and they may or may not be precursors to an assault or murder"

Again, thanks to all of you and of course, much gratitude to Tricia for creating and managing this site.

Hey, Doc (love your avatar), don't hesitate to give us your opinions. Most of the people who get into trouble here IMO are those who make statements like "I don't like Martinez" or "He's too mean" or something, boom, period, done. If you can explain WHY you think the way you do, you may get people who disagree, but we won't take a contract out on you.

Of course, sometimes we misunderstand each other, I've certainly had that problem myself, but mostly people here are friendly, thoughtful and, best of all, funny.

 

[SunnyinMO]

Any guess as to how long JW will drag this on? Will we be moving to the next witness today? lease:

Nope....JW is gonna drag this one as long as possible, then jury questions....next week at the earliest IMO

 

[G&AMom]

only for cases like these, where you can't find a decent professional to take a certain side.

Which I guess explains why Jose Baez has been on.

 

[TigerBalm]

David Lohr's youtube account will no longer be uploading videos, he started a new channel.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgUfEufj0Gw"] ATTENTION: Where To Find Jodi Arias And Other Crime Videos [/ame]

New channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/CrimeTimeVids

 

[Texas Lady]

I have really been thinking about her insistence that TA wasn't acting like he was being stalked. I personally think it stands to reason that a man might believe he can "manage" his stalker. I know my own husband had an ex-girlfriend that wouldn't let go and he never sought any restraining orders or took any extreme security measures. He thought he could handle it on his own. My husband's ex eventually went away, thank God, but obviously TA wasn't as lucky. Maybe TA was of the mindset that he was a man and he wasn't in any real danger, other than slashed tires and social media snooping, etc. I don't know. Just doesn't seem that odd to me that he didn't run to the police station or change his codes/locks.

MOO

Just to add IMO He also thought she was 1000 miles away until she showed up and caught him off guard on June 4

 

[SoSueMe]

We are allowing the link to the articles about cyberstalking and witness intimidation so that you may see the severity of the problem we're facing.

This is NOT an open invitation to express your views on the matter one way or the other.

If you have made disparaging remarks about the defense team or their witnesses, go back and delete your comments or alert the post and ask that a moderator delete it for you.

In the past week, we've been issuing 24-timeouts for name calling and disparaging remarks. Future timeouts for this type of violation will be extended to include at least 3 days of trial coverage.

Please check your posts now.

Thank you.

 

[ynotdivein]

Members, please read this article from USA Today and you will realize why we've had to be so strict on the name calling and disparaging remarks of the defense team's witnesses.

Could it be construed as witness intimidation? Regardless of the argument for or against free speech, Websleuths will not be responsible for giving the appearance of any organized effort to intimidate or tamper with any witness during any trial.

We ask that you please post responsibly.

Thank you.
Sue and Tricia
Websleuths.com Owners

:bump: and :tyou:

 

[laniefi]

:rocker::great:

ready to watch more trial....
Juan shoulda been a dentist:
Pulling teeth....:banghead:

Juan Martinez, DDS

 

[Novice Seeker]

I just logged in so I don't know if this has been mentioned:

AZRepublic Front Page:
ARIAS WITNESS FEELS SOCIAL MEDIA'S GLARE

Online attacks on defense expert decried as digital "lynch mob"

All this sent her to the hospital last weekend.
Is it witness tampering?
Threats to ALV office and online and Amazon
Possibility of removal of TV cameras.

I would post a link but I don't know how.

The advances in technology has removed obstacles such physical distance and allows the public access to information. These advances are allowing individuals access to things such as court proceedings which I believe is a good thing bc it's encouraging an interest in individuals and a wonderful educational tool about our judicial system.

Just look at what our group does. We are fortunate to have a group of attorneys who we can count on to educate and/or explain how our judicial system works. I, for one, have developed a better informed understanding about our judicial system that go so much further than any text book ever did.

The advances in technology can now be utilized in order to hold government officials, professionals, organizations, etc., accountable for their platform sort of speak. ALV is good example of this. As an expert in the field of DV, her opinions are being used in determining what's in the best interest of children and families. As an expert, ALV is counseling individuals, influencing laws involving domestic violence and teaching others about DV.

And, from what I have been able to observe from listening to her, bc of these advances in technology, I have developed an opinion that she is extremely bias and prejudicial. And given the power ALV has been allowed in the field of DV, she is extremely dangerous, IMO.

So, although some may want to label us as a lynch mob, I see it as holding a professional expert accountable for the standards defined in her field of expertise.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

She's really devolving, isn't she? Evil acts rot you from the inside out.

 

[ClosArgs]

I'm a little confused is the next defense witness Dworkin the forensics computer specialist, or Neumeister the forensics audio/video enhancement specialist?

 

[SusieD]

I'm confused. Why is his testimony needed, has the state contested that evidence or suggested it is not real?

I bet he's going to state that he cannot tell what phone a tape was recorded from.

(I think if there was some kind of digital signature on the recording that identified the device that had the record button pressed, we would have heard that. It would be definitive evidence as to who recorded the call.

So this expert will tell there's no way to be sure, thus no way to rule out TA


How lame.

 

[Isabelle]

This according to the St Vs Jodi Arias FB page
Confirmed - The def. next witness will be the computer expert who verified the phone sex audio.

Wonder if the expert will verify who initiated the call?

 

[gcharlie]

ALV: "Everyone has a right to be angry. It's what you do when you get there that makes a difference."

Ok. Ms. LV, have you taken a look at what the Defendant did to Mr. Alexander?

She's made so many comments that are chilling within the "context" of this trial. What is striking is that she is oblivious to the fact that she's doing it.

But in her mind, with domestic violence it takes one to tango.