trial day 47: the defense continues its case in chief #143

[TigerBalm]

:giggle: For some odd reason this song came to mind, enjoy while we wait.
[video=youtube;DmeUuoxyt_E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmeUuoxyt_E[/video]

 

[Pink Panther]

OMG I cannot believe that the DA was allowed to completely waste a day away on such silliness! Unbelievable!

moo

 

[SheltieMom1]

Do I have it right that ALV testimony has nothing to do with prosecution misconduct since that was denied? So, her being ordered back is because of something "SHE" said/did or did not do?

I believe you are correct.

 

[VALee]

WildAboutTrial @WildAboutTrial


Still waiting in the hallway lounge area. Love sitting here like a dingus all afternoon. Extremely fun. # jodiarias

 

[CourtsideMike]

When HLN first took over trial coverage the overall delay was about an hour. The last time I tried to catch up on TV at night .. it went all the way into Dr Drew Show... almost 3 hours of GD commercials!

I know. it's bar-none the most infuriating thing. Then they talk for 5 mins how you didn't miss anything.

When they were doing juror questions they literally asked 2 questions and then it was back to commercial.
I can't even watch it anymore.. it's a money grab and a complete joke.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

So whatever ALV did it was a biggie. This is a long hearing.

:floorlaugh: Oh, to be a fly on the wall ! I agree that it's a "biggie" !

Oh, I hope we find out "something" about this hearing in chambers ... anything !

 

[BritsKate]

For those who care and were here earlier today. DD MADE THE CHEER SQUAD!:great:

Awesome! Now whenever she asks you for anything for the next 6-12 months or so, just remind her you were there in the audience rooting for her. Eventually, she'll get so tired of the stock answer, she'll stop asking. I think.

(The whole 'Do you even know how many months of bed rest I was on?' has proven especially effective with my squeamish 11 year old son. Now, I get: 'Here, Mom, would you like your slippers?' and 'Here's a blanket so your legs aren't cold.') I should write a parenting manual! :floorlaugh:

 

[Maryann123]

He is a potential defense witness in that he blew up or somehow improved upon that still picture of Travis face and saw Jodi in Travis pupil. I think the DT wants to argue that she was just taking a picture...no knife or gun. But if you see the picture, it is very subjective. Looks like a stick drawing with right hand held up high. To me it looked like she had a knife. To JM it looked like a dog. Haha. The guy, Bryan whatever, is a camera or computer specialist. He testifies often for both defense and prosecutors in that county. Supposed to be very reputable. But a person would see anything they want. Sort of like looking at a cloud.

I don't see a DOG-gone thing except for the drawing he makes on the image. In that image, I see her reaching (with the arm on the left) behind her back and pulling a knife out of her waistband. Yea, I know.....I really don't see the knife! Other than that, it's clear as mud.

Like somebody else said, it's like looking at clouds, you see one thing, and I see another.

 

[Donnareit]

He offers nothing of value. The state has never alleged that Jodi was holding a knife while that photograph was taken. The state posits that the knife became involved during the time between the sitting photo and the ceiling photo. The eye reflection does not to disprove that even if it did show Jodi without a knife.

The way I understood Nurmi: The evidence would bolster Jodi's claim that she had both hands on the camera and was holding it at chest level. Ok . . . but so what? She said she was squatting. Almost a minute passes between that pix and the one of the ceiling. So, again, huh?

 

[Angelina Frost]

I just wished Nurmi could get smacked with contempt of court for this nonsense and abuse of the jurors and families. He's playing games with people's lives.

ITA. Two motions for mistrial denied in one day. Utter joke. Don't expect anything else from such an untalented bunch though- they made up an entire defense based on outright fabrication.

Nurmi had the nerve to say that they wouldn't "stoop" to the tactics employed by the State. No, of course not. Not like making up an abuse defense and lying about the murder victim being a pedophile lowered the bar at all. :banghead:

 

[here_now12]

He is a potential defense witness in that he blew up or somehow improved upon that still picture of Travis face and saw Jodi in Travis pupil. I think the DT wants to argue that she was just taking a picture...no knife or gun. But if you see the picture, it is very subjective. Looks like a stick drawing with right hand held up high. To me it looked like she had a knife. To JM it looked like a dog. Haha. The guy, Bryan whatever, is a camera or computer specialist. He testifies often for both defense and prosecutors in that county. Supposed to be very reputable. But a person would see anything they want. Sort of like looking at a cloud.

This whole thing with the blown up eye image reminds me of some person's youtube channel who took stills from (not HQ) images of Travis' eye and allegedly 'proved' Jodi's innocence because his pictures showed that Travis was murdered by four people, one of them wearing a ceremonial headdress of some sort. Basically, it was lines drawn into a blown up iris and pupil. Basically, it looked the same as was shown in court this morning, just with more lines...

I mean, of course there's situations when you can see a mirror image of the person taking the photograph in the picture of someone's eye. In this case? I don't think you see anything except a light point from the flash. You're right, it's a lot like cloud-gazing.

 

[TexMex]

Why would they want to end their case with this eye crap? Minimal benefit. Jodi already admits the killing. Plus the pic of the face is at 5:29:20 and the first accidental pic is at 5:31:14, lots of time to grab her knife

 

[Jeffssis]

He is a potential defense witness in that he blew up or somehow improved upon that still picture of Travis face and saw Jodi in Travis pupil. I think the DT wants to argue that she was just taking a picture...no knife or gun. But if you see the picture, it is very subjective. Looks like a stick drawing with right hand held up high. To me it looked like she had a knife. To JM it looked like a dog. Haha. The guy, Bryan whatever, is a camera or computer specialist. He testifies often for both defense and prosecutors in that county. Supposed to be very reputable. But a person would see anything they want. Sort of like looking at a cloud.

Exactly!!

 

[katiedid2]

WildAboutTrial @WildAboutTrial

Still waiting in the hallway lounge area. Love sitting here like a dingus all afternoon. Extremely fun. # jodiarias

Who's. waiting there?.?

 

[leebee52]

 

[seguek9]

Eye guy is Brian....Defense trying to get him qualified as an expert on the pic of Travis. Says he can see person reflected in Travis' eye.

Defense motion for mistrial DENIED.

Waiting for closed hearing about ALV to be over. Supposed to have some testimony today but nothing yet.

Good succinct summation...
but ...there were TWO motions for mistrials :denied: denied today....Nurmi blew his margins in one embarrassing swoop today....Imo.

 

[Irisha]

The NY times report of the suspect is that it was a 20-year-old Saudi who was arrested with severe burns on his hands. From what I can piece together from various articles, it appears he planted backpacks in trash cans. The link is earlier in this thread.

OT That's been discounted by NYPD, per CNN

 

[kayice]

Please if this has been discussed, im sorry however... didnt the killer say she was kneeling when the camera dropped?? how is this new eye pix supposed to help. Even Nurmi said it supported the evidence. WTH?

That's what I thought! And Travis was sitting down in the shower, makes no sense except to hide that Arias probably pulled a knife out her sock or wherever and stuck Travis in the chest. This is a distraction away from the evidence.

 

[Nore]

The NY times report of the suspect is that it was a 20-year-old Saudi who was arrested with severe burns on his hands. From what I can piece together from various articles, it appears he planted backpacks in trash cans. The link is earlier in this thread.

---------------
Since this was a World Wide event they should draw straws as to who gets to take the perp out in backyard...and SHOOT HIM!!

 

[JSR]

The judge has to be so careful with her ruling. If she accepts the science involved and feels it is reliable science, she sets a legal precedent for future cases involving over-blown-up photo interpretation.

Absolutely. She has to be very careful in her ruling. She would have to be even more careful if it was brought by the state. But in this case it's not.

Most Judges take Daubert motions seriously. In my own cases I've seen 20 page Daubert Opinions issued.