trial day 45: the defense continues its case in chief #137

[TartLemon]

This latest incarnation of Jodi starting s**t with twitter and website is not shocking.

Being on trial for the brutal slaying of Travis is a 'game' she's bored with. Been there, done it and ready to move on.

Star power in prison doesn't last long. Soon, Jodi will be in with the hardened lifer criminals. She'll quickly find out what they really think of her 'fame'.

 

[Mellinyce]

I plead the 5th:floorlaugh:

:floorlaugh:

 

[gitana1]

What did you learn about Travis? Not only did he push Sister MaryJodi around, he also tried to push PPL on everyone.

Isn't that pretty typical for insurance people, real estate agents, amway or avon salespeople? That's how any independent contractor builds their business.

She just couldn't give him a break and I felt this was just a real, little dig on her part, and totally unnecessary. Like he's a sleazy salesman on top of being an abuser and a pedophile.

I think Laviolette is defensively clinging to her position to the point of losing any semblance of reasonableness because she can't stand that professionally, she applied confirmation bias and that fact is being exposed.

I'm all for Jodi getting the death penalty or life in prison but what is happening to Allyce Laviollette is disgusting. People really shouldn't try to reach out and touch someone through social media. She's not the first to testify on behalf of a presumed guilty sociopathic creepy defendant and she won't be the last. She appears to believe in her conclusions about Jodi and if shs is testifying bull crap to ass8st in the acquital of evil, then we should allow the universe to address her as it sees fit. The internet has made people rude and wicked under the guise of anonymity.

I 100% agree. Calling hideous names, sending threatening or mean-spirited e-mails to her, trying to get those who have slated her for speaking engagements to cancel, and falsely reviewing her books is just nasty, immature and ugly behavior. Her loss of integrity shouldn't be an excuse for others to lose theirs as well. And listen, I felt sick, angry and disgusted about how she bashed an innocent, dead man, and how she acted like she was there, describing things she has no way of knowing happened. But come on, this behavior is not helpful.

I know many folks think this, but I don't believe it. Her attitude tells me that she knows a lot more than she "claims". She just chooses what to believe. :twocents:

I think she does too but i think she applied confirmation bias and simply ignored what didn't fit. She knows deep down that she's probably wrong but the more she's challenged the more entrenched in her position she'll become because it's her professional rep she's protecting now.

What she doesn't get is that her stubborn, unreasonable defensiveness has shattered her credibility.

Hey everyone!

I'm just getting back to the threads after anxiously waiting for the jury questions to begin. I got to hear the first 3 questions and then LOST my interwebs connection! :tears:

Forgive me if this has been asked, but I know most of you have the answer.... did the judge finish with juror questions and has anyone posted the questions somewhere? TIA

Yes, the judge ended the day with juror questions but they are not over. There will be more questions tomorrow. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpD-h5MVsZU"]Jodi Arias Trial - Day 45 - Part 2 (Juror Questions) - YouTube[/ame]

I really enjoyed the ending questions today but right after court I decided to listen to the sex recording again and there is something to what ALV says. I don't know how much this will effect the jury but after listening about 20 times and then having the hubby listen it does sound as if Travis does say (to the best I can tell) "like corking the pot of a little girl."
I looked up corking on the urban dictionary and there are a few references, IDK.
it's cued to right at the point after her awful orgasm at 39:17 and he says she sounds like a twelve year old having her first orgasm and then ?

Again it's hard to hear unless you have good speakers, head phones or ear buds but it is there. I've never done this with a youtube video, hope it works.

Any opinions or thoughts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nOtxgjYek_I#t=2358s

A thanks wasn't quite enough!

I agree, and I think it was part of their role play. Since he's talking about a 12 year old girl's "first orgasm" it makes sense that he was trying to say popping the cork of a hot little girl. Popping the cork, as I understand it, can refer to either an orgasm or taking someone's virginity.

Tacky and icky, yes. Abusive and the sign of a genuine pedophile, NO.

Travis did not say "hot little girl". I agree that he probably said something about popping the cork of a little girl, though. For some men, the thought of a girl's first sexual experience is alluring - not because she's a child, but because the thought of the first orgasm ever, the first time feeling the power of a sexual experience, is exciting.

But you take any such man who thinks of a young girl having her first orgasm and place an actual kid in front of them, and the vast majority will be repelled at the thought of anything sexual involving such a child.

They are not actually fantasizing about a child. they are fantasizing about the power of the first sexual experience.

There is zero evidence that Travis was a pedophile. There is a lot of evidence that he liked sex with full grown women.

:floorlaugh: My husband was also shocked to find out his status as an abuser.
I just can't understand how ALV can conclude DV in a couple who never lived together. In order for DV to exsist don't you need the domestic part?

This is not true. There are many accounts of domestic violence occurring between teenage couples, for example, who do not live together.

But I see zero evidence of DV in this case. It's ridiculous.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I looked up cork the pop on the urban legend site and I can't believe that could be humanly possible. :what: I am shocked and amazed. jmo

I looked it up too. Pop rocks and soda? Is that the definition your found as well?

 

[LolaBaby3]

Okay, I was thinking about ALV for the last couple of days. And I hope my thinking makes sense. Here is a woman who dedicates her life to victims of domestic abuse. She should be commended for that. Vunerable people need more people like her to be their voice.

BUT this is where I think she got this wrong. She is testifying for the wrong side. Travis was a victim of DV. Stalking him, sneaking into his home uninvited, watching him from a window making out with another girl, creeping into all of his social media accounts, bank accounts, betraying his privacy...oh yeah...there is just one more thing...murdering him in such a cruel, cruel way.

While she may have helped a lot of people as a psychotherapist working for those who were DV victims...in this case she got it very wrong.

Travis Alexander was the victim of abuse as a child and unfortunately as an adult as well paying the ultimate price with his life. What really struck me was when ALV was talking about his family of origin...why did this young man have such a horrific start in life and such a horrific end in life? Doesn't seem fair...

Please ALV...give Travis the dignity to at least recognize him as the true victim of domestic violence. He ended up with 29 stab wounds, a slit throat and being shot in the head. JA decided that his final moments on earth should be spent in pain, confused, vulnerable and in fear. And if that weren't enough even after killing him - she continues to abuse him by humiliating his honor with false allegations - that truly shows her wickedness. JA was the perpetrator, the abuser and the murderer in this case - plain and simple.

What a sad, sad case- for Travis, his family and friends. Sad.

 

[Lorelilly]

I'm still catching up on the juror questions but there's something that really bothers me....

ALV said that one of things that she noticed about Travis was that he would make these sexual advances toward other women.....if they were not "with it" he would back off (paraphrasing).

Soooo if he made these sexual advances toward Jodi....he didn't back off....because Jodi was "with it"...
IMO real men do back off if a woman says "no".

To me that was the wrong thing for ALV to say. JMO

ALV is stuck back in time as in "Wow, did you get to Second Base?" Stone Age.

 

[Wendy101]

Yes, they did. It was good, but was it conclusive, really clear? I had trouble freezing the frame, if it was the same one you saw.

I wonder if that video can be used, or maybe it has been.

Because some of JA's lies are more hideous than others, I hope that finger lie, which was connected to the pedo lie, can be conclusively smashed.

i have never seen a side by side of it though.. It sure would be interesting... Also, if it is bent, the way it is today.. Someone needs to emal it to Juan

 

[Sleuth5]

ALV said that soldier and police "often" go over the top and don't know when to stop--which leads to excessive force. She said, just like police and soldiers, abused women don't know when enough is enough or when to stop.

Did she really say that? She said that as if police and soldiers are constantly using excessive force.

Is she serious about that? THEN she has the nerve to start talking about movies? Sustained.....

Yes, she did say that, and it was incredibly annoying. Her generalizing was maddening, as usual.

I have had "combat training" and worked in "law enforcement." Oddly enough, I know many other men and women who also have. The percentage of people who actually go wild with bloodlust or simply empty their weapons at the first sign of trouble is amazingly small, because -- well, there's that operative word involved, "training." The purpose of said training is to teach you how to deal with an immediate threat to your life without panicking and losing control of your reactions. She acts as though there is some facile cause and effect relationship with everything, and that she, by virtue of the wide-angle lenses afforded by her stylish eyewear, is alone in her ability to perceive the "big picture."

This has been the most annoying week of my life. Really!

 

[Boytwnmom]

though both she and Nurmi seem tone deaf when it comes to reading the jury I don't know how even she can ignore the obvious import of the juror questions. The ALV ship has sailed and is sinking fast. She needs to get her out of there asap. If she does the usual and goes over every single question again, she really needs to go into a different line of work.

The one thing you can't change a juror's mind about is credibility. Your witness either has it or doesn't and once lost it is almost impossible to regain. ALV's responses to juror questions is not, IMO, doing anything to salvage her credibility. If anything it has likely confirmed, hopefully for her future, the "best" opinion the jury could have, that ALV was misled by the defendant and defense and fed selective excerpts of evidence to bolster their case and she was manipulated by her likely tender feelings for abuse victims. That's the "charitable" conclusion. The other option is they think she is so incredibly biased against men that she can even find a slaughtered man with no history of violence or abuse or even being a mean guy, to be the "worst" abuser she's ever seen in order to save the "victim" who slaughtered him and then lied about it and then decided to defame her victim with allegations of abuse and pedophilia. And ALV decided to be her champion. Not a winning strategy in front of an unbiased jury.

I am more and more hopeful that Juan's hard work is paying off and the jury is composed of thoughtful, serious individuals who are committed to doing their duty and ensuring justice is served.

And to think we haven't even seen the rebuttal case yet.

At first, I was a little worried about a couple of the juror questions that made it sound like JA was so abused that she just snapped. But as more questions were asked, it seems like the jurors know exactly how biased and anti-men ALV is. And we still get more questions tomorrow - yay! It should be interesting to see JW try to rehabilitate ALV after these questions!!

 

[StephanieHartPI]

And another thing.

I don't want to hear about the big picture anymore. I want to hear about the day she nearly cut off an innocent man's head and dragged him back to the shower full of stab wounds then shot him in the face.

You can save the stories about when she was three and she found out there was no Santa Claus, and when she was 8 and her mom and dad wouldn't take her to Disneyland (because they said it was closed like my mom and dad used to have say when I asked to go for the 29th time on any given Saturday morning)

 

[wasnt_me]

Did the Jury listen to Jodi telling Travis she wanted her to *advertiser censored* in her face?

Want do you think of that Alice?

Or that he liked to work the booty, Alice? And Booty means "buttocks" for the old fashioned.

 

[Lorelilly]

I find it weird that she doesn't have email. These days all businesses correspond via email. Even Samuels had. Email on his website. Or am I weird.

NO you're NOT weird. SHE IS! Lord she frustrates me every time she tries to answer a question. I'm sitting here right now with my cat Lola and I'm shaking my head. I've found myself doing that a lot lately. I can't wait till this case is over and Lola agrees. Mew:facepalm:

 

[Linda7NJ]

And another thing.

I don't want to hear about the big picture anymore. I want to hear about the day she nearly cut off an innocent man's head and dragged him back to the shower full of stab wounds then shot him in the face.

You can save the stories about when she was three and she found out there was no Santa Claus, and when she was 8 and her mom and dad wouldn't take her to Disneyland (because they said it was closed like my mom and dad used to have say when I asked to go for the 29th time on any given Saturday morning)

Yes, the big picture. = what the defense handed her and what Jodi said.

 

[beeshie]

Here is one with ALL of the questions.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205216&page=3


You can go there and read the questions, but it is locked down to prevent posting replies right now. Mods are doing a clean up. :slap:

Since it's locked, I'll say here that Schuby did a great job posting the questions. Thank you, Schuby!

P.S. loved the comic book exclamations, too. Zap!

 

[Brattigirle]

One would think that ALV can get a sense from the Juror questions that the Jury knows more of this story than she does and maybe she needs to start watching out for her reputation.

 

[katydid23]

It really bothers me when ALV uses the killers previous two boyfriends to say ' see, no violence there.'

First of all, she omitted the first boyfriend, Bobbie Juarez, and there was DV in that relationship. She ignored that volatility.

But with MM and DB, she was moving on by mutual consent. She was not madly in love and then rejected by either one of them. She did catch MM cheating, but they had
already drifted away from each other. She was not obsessed with him.

I do think it is weird that she began dating MM< seeing as he was Bobbie Juarez's
roomie. That seems kind of rudely awkward for BJ.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Or that he liked to work the booty, Alice? And Booty means "buttocks" for the old fashioned.

Roflmao! I almost choked to death on a sip of soda when reading this.

You should delete it....as I feel abused.

 

[IBsleuthin]

I think her refusal to acknowledge stalking was listed on her continuum under terrorism was HUGE. If whe won't acknowledge something that's sitting right there in black and white, for all the world to see (including the jury), it's not too far of a leap to think she won't see what she doesn't want to see about anything. For me, it was a defining moment in her testimony and wrapped up everything she testified to and whether or not it was credible.

BBM

I completely agree. And, IIRC that continuum Juan presented was in fact ALV's own continuum??



The fact that I listened to the 911 recording today and Travis' friends REPEATEDLY state to the dispatch that Travis was being "STALKED" by Jodi was stunning.

So how is it that this 'expert' will simply refuse to admit this in the face of the facts???

If this situation were reversed and JA's friends were telling the 911 dispatch that she had been stalked and now found murdered, in my opinion this trial would have already been over by now.

This trial is beginning to get tiresome.

 

[SmileBaby]

I've thought often as I listen to ALV, of the saying "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." She was brought in to "evaluate whether there was domestic violence" in the relationship. To me, there's sort of a wink there, because she's inclined to see DV everywhere. So much of what she looked at is subject to interpretation. If you go into it, looking for evidence of DV, you could find it in the angry texts/IMs he sent her. According to her continuum, that type of behavior would be an adjunct to physical abuse. That is why she talks so often about "the whole picture", because she sees patterns and believes all these things go together. They all fit the profile of an abuser.

She's an activist. I don't doubt her sincerity. She has spent her whole career supporting women, exposing the issue of domestic violence, and I admire that. BUT she's so wrong in this case. I do believe that her framework of power differential between men and women blinds her to abuse on the part of women. It doesn't hurt that the sociopath defendant "plays the victim" very very well.

 

[Ammonitida]

And somehow from her SmittenWithJodi perch, she does not believe peeping into anyone's window (when she couldn't get in through the garage because Travis changed the code), crawling through the doggie door, driving thousands of miles at the drop of a hat, calling incessantly and driving 3 hours to confront the possible gf of an EX-bf is stalking.

In fact, she stubbornly refused to acknowledge "stalking" was even listed on her continuum under Terrorism since she would have to admit Jodi was actually well, creepy.

Jodi didn't report an alleged broken finger or get medical treatment, document the abuse in her journals, reach out to anyone or sound the general alarm but no doubt in LaViolette's mind there was abuse.

Travis was being relentlessly pursued, waking to find a loon sleeping on his couch, having all of his accounts hacked, e-mails sent from his account, being followed while on dates, having her peeping in his windows and moving 1200 miles to a place close to him after the break-up did not rise to the level of stalking because there was no report of stalking, no report to police, nothing written in his journals BUT he did tell his friends about it but it still doesn't count because he didn't get a restraining order.

Just absolutely refused to give even one eighth of an inch to acknowledge the possibility, no matter how small, that Jodi wasn't abused.

And insists she's objective and unbiased.

I want to know what kind of hypnotic trance that jailbird is putting these people into or what kind of hex curse she's got 'cos I could use it in my personal life.

Evidence that Travis didn't break the finger,

1. Her journal references no broken finger on the date in question. She doesn't have to mention that Travis did it. Hell, she could have just wrote, "the last two days have been rough and I'd rather not write about that here". Instead she writes, "nothing noteworthy happened". Furthermore, contradicting her claims that this omission had to do with her "promise" to Travis and the "Laws of attraction", Jodi proceeds to write negative things about Travis right after her, "nothing noteworthy" comment. Plus, she stated on her blog that she stopped believing in the laws of attraction during the period in question.

2. The text messages between the Jodi and Travis on the dates (Jan 21st, Jan 22nd) she alleges the pedophilia and broken finger provide no corroboration either. Their texts speak of pedestrian things, as Juan put it -- depositing money and trading cars. She even says, "I'll make it up to you soon!".

3. Conflicting stories about how the finger was damaged. Her first story about the finger was given on July 15 2008, where she described what sounds like a flexor tendon injury. She attributes it to a cut on the finger, incurred from an attack by the female intruder on June 4. She makes no mention of not being able to straighten it (like she claims now), but talks about how she can't BEND it all the way which is exactly what a flexor injury would do. Perhaps the injury to the flexor tendon later extended to the extender tendon due to not healing properly? Whatever the case, her conflicting stories further damage her credibility.