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

[Nezumi]

the one of him sitting is the last alive photo. she may have had a weapon then. i just don't remember how much time elapsed between the close up and the sitting photo and the ceiling shot. but at SOME point, we KNOW she got a weapon.

this didn't prove anything at all.

Exactly. He has stipulated that she didn't have a knife or gun in her hand at this particular moment. Not that she didn't have either or both on her person.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Did the defense rest?

I'm pretty sure that was what the stipulation was about--the DT wanted that Bryan guy to show the jury a "picture" of Jodi taking the photo with no weapons in her hand. JM stipulated to it so the guy doesn't testify in court, wasting further time.

That's my impression--I don't have confirmation on it.

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

The only thing I don't like about this stipulation is the jurors wondering how on earth they would know that and agree to it.

I think from what we've heard from the jurors questions, this group is pretty smart. If they understand what a stipulation is we have nothing to worry about. No one is claiming to KNOW exactly what happened, JM is just stipulating to that sentence. The wording of the sentence is vital.
There is still one minute from the time that pic was taken to the one where the ceiling shot was taken. Plenty of time to grab a knife or a gun. The exact wording is the key.
No one is claiming to know. And the TH's are saying this is HUGE HUGE HUGE. NOT. NOT. NOT.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

On phone so can't search, but that eye pic was posted here by a poster way back on one of the bazillion trial threads..

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Lorelilly]

I see posts saying that it is rebuttal time, but I didn't hear the defense rest. Wouldn't the defense rest first? and wouldn't they have done that today?

They haven't rested yet. And so help me God if the DT makes more Mistrial attempts tomorrow morning which in turn makes court start late I AM GOING TO SCREAM! WTH didn't the judge ask the DT today what their next move is? I'm frustrated.

 

[MandyLeigh]

I honestly feel like I have been hit in the head. :facepalm:

I can't believe Nurmi. I heard just as you all who listened to the live feed did about the eye photo. Makes no sense but I feel Juan has a reason, probably wanting this trial to get moving and agreeing to something so stupid isn't going to bother or sway anything anyway.

Now, HLN is running the footage from early this morning about Jodi's twitter and I caught Nurmi talking. He is complaining that the Prosecutor is just using Jodi twittering to take attention off his misconduct. REALLY? Oh it wouldn't have anything to do with you Nurmi bringing the outside world into the courtroom and if you want to play that game we can talk about Jodi's twitter account would it? Oh NO, it must be silly old Juan just wanting to deflect attention away from his super star grand standing... :banghead:

I can't believe Nurmi :banghead: has a license to operate anything let alone a position in the court room. I'm sorry but this man will say absolutely anything no matter how convoluted it is. There is something very wrong with that becuase that is not the best way to do things for your client.

 

[Words2Serve]

That bothers me that JM would concede to that, and that the judge would.... if this jury believes self defense she could get off. Just the statement coming from the judge can make it come across to jurors that she didn't have a gun on her 'person', and for some they would feel she needed to be prepared in that moment to pull this off.

I agree with all of you that say we can't know that for sure, and to me that flash/white could have definitely been something in her hand.... I think this was a big deal.

 

[websurfer]

well..I am gonna be outta here till tomorrow...so see ya! Have a good night all. I am going to watch the Boston up to date coverages..

 

[elementary]

at that point. It just doesn't matter in any way to the case and so, who cares basically. I can't believe they expended this time and energy to show that when she was a taking a picture she was holding a camera. It's just like then she stopped taking pictures intentionally and picked up a gun and knife and killed him.

I imagine that's the reason he agreed to the stipulation- because in the end it makes no difference. There was enough time for her to whip out a gun and knife before the next frame. But I wonder, JM fought hard to keep it out, and yet.... I don't get it.

 

[KarmicLaw]

Well, Juan may be comfortable with this stipulation, but I'm not. How the hell could they tell from that picture whether she was or was not holding a weapon???

I can't help but feel the same way! I know it's shock so I am relying on my fellow WS'ers to talk me down...

 

[JSR]

****. Just heard on HLN it's being reported that one of the dead is a 8 year old child.

 

[SoCalBuck]

I think both sides are of the same understanding at this point: the longer this trial drags on, the more likely a mistrial.

This jury has not been sequestered, and the chance of a juror being unduly influenced increases as the days go on.
We've already lost 2 jurors and one was for health reasons. It is not unrealistic to expect someone will need to be excused again soon. I believe there are only 4 more jurors that can afford to be let go.

It is in Juan's best interest to end this trial ASAP. The juror questions leave no doubt to the mindset of this jury. A guilty verdict would be a virtual certainty right now.

 

[audreyparker]

Right, her weapons were in her pocket, or in her purse on the floor next to her. You can't snap a photo AND stab someone in the heart.

I bet she did drop the camera though, to distract and surprise him, by then her knife was out and ready for business.

I think you're right! I think that she dropped the camera and he may even have bent over to try to pick it up and that's when she started stabbing him.

 

[lil_buddy]

And not only was it smart to avoid jurors seeing whatever they could find in the photo, by stipulating that it shows she is unarmed it begs them to disagree -- and I suspect a lot of them will do precisely that. They will look at that picture and say, "there's no way i can tell whether she does or does not have a weapon by looking at that picture." So in one fell swoop, Juan nullified the utility of the evidence.

:cow:

yeah, I was thinking the jurors must be like "whoa, I never thought that she may have had a weapon pointed at him in that picture..."

Now the idea is their heads.

 

[corundogs]

OK question for people who are truly paying attention and don't have their time divided by the bombings.

What were JSS's EXACT words?

Did she say the photo doesn't prove she was holding a weapon?

It doesn't SHOW she was holding a weapon?

There is no indication one way or another if she was holding a weapon?

I mean, this is just mind boggling that it was brought up. Who on that jury thought that there was any indication at all what was reflected in his eye??

I am as blown away (maybe bad choice of words here) by this as I am by the bombings. Guess that shows how desensitized I personally am by this type of tragedy. That this could blindside me as much as public bombings!

 

[noonie]

Jodi not holding a Knife or gun in her hands while taking the picture. Big deal. She could have had it in her waistband behind her back, Snapped the picture, blinded him with the flash, Dropped the camera and pulled the knife and stabbed him.

I was going to type the exact same thing but you said it for me. That is exactly what happeded. She had it hidden on her somewhere!

 

[Love Never Fails]

But it was the smart move, to avoid having the jurors speculate about what they thought they could see in the obviously vague image. And not only was it smart to avoid jurors seeing whatever they could find in the photo, by stipulating that it shows she is unarmed it begs them to disagree -- and I suspect a lot of them will do precisely that. They will look at that picture and say, "there's no way i can tell whether she does or does not have a weapon by looking at that picture." So in one fell swoop, Juan nullified the utility of the evidence.

:cow:

I can agree. JM will make this a non issue. But we can chew on it all night. Ha.

 

[kscornfed]

Face pic is 5:29:20, pic of bottom sitting in shower 5:30:30 then accidental pic of ceiling is 5:31:14

so from the face pic, there's over a minute to the next picture. plenty of time for her to get her gear ready to kill him.

this is a non-issue. just a little add-on for a desperate, gasping defense which is going to fail.

i'm just glad we don't have to listen to nurmi and 'aaaaaand, then after high schooooool, did you attend college?'

 

[rose222]

Isn't it strange that Nurmi claims that the jurors are watching the news etc. but at the same time he allows his client to post deranged comments on twitter?

 

[kayice]

http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/na...avis-Alexanders-eye-reflection-before-killing

Conflicting 'experts' disagree on eye views.

I think we can agree its an elephant, and we know they never forget. I hope they pull testimony to see if the door was closed or open...water droplets on the glass door. Did Jodi open the door to stab him? Was he even posing for pics or did he think Jodi had already left, Travis getting ready for his conference call at 6pm?