trial day 48: REBUTTAL #147

[Boodles]

Dr.D and JW probably have had previous run ins. I know they've had hearings where JW has interviewed/crossed Dr.D before.

Yeah, that occurred to me, too. And the defendant seems to hate her. Wouldn't you have loved to be a fly on the wall of their interview?

 

[Sherbie]

I thought the exact same thing. But then I listened to this brilliant young woman, and putting her next to the two defense experts, IMHO, is like night and day DESPITE the fact that she is young and relatively new to her career.

I agree. And I would like to hear from JM on re-direct: "Should a psychological evaluator be aware of and follow standard protocols immediately upon entering practice, or does it take 10, 20 or 35 or more years to learn and adhere to those standards?"

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I'm a visual learner, i.e. I understand something I see far more than something I hear. So, if JM wanted to show the list of BPD indicators to the jury [great idea], why not provide a clear, enlarged list on the screen, rather than his teensy, cramped handwriting? Can all the jurors read his writing on the scene, because I couldn't?

I think the courtroom is equipped with a "jumbo-tron" type screen. At least that is the impression I got when the who-ha pics of JA's Netherlands were up for all to view.

 

[Softail]

People here keep referring to age. I don't think it's age per se. I think JW is focused on experience, which can be a function of age. But she is right, dr d has fewer years of experience, and when she went through the CV, it surprised me a little compared to the vast knowledge she displayed on direct. However, her academic/educational background and training seem very impressive, and she is current on the science /protocols behind evaluation. She also seems to have moved very (unusually) quickly into managerial/supervisory capacities, which is interesting.

She knows her stuff, and is very confident. But I'm surprised most others didn't notice a perceptible change in demeanor once Juan was done and JW got up to bat. I felt immediate vibes, like a "prickliness" from Dr d. Nothing like the flagrant and bizarre behavior of ALV, but a definite attitude, which is not the end of the world as she's still extremely credible. But I found that bit of attitude disappointing, and hope it's gone today, especially when they "get into it" on substantive issues (if JW can get to any).

Did no one else notice?

I noticed it too. It was ever so slight, but she definitely had her guard up. I'm sure she knew JW would go after her "lack" of experience, via depositions and pre-trial stuff. It probably pissed her off (Dr. D), as she seems perfectly competent to me. :twocents:

 

[Gypseagirl]

Do any of you recall several days ago, during one of the multitude of side-bars that the Def was asking to "approach" when JM was giving ALV her cross.

Several here had noted that ALV turned to the Jurors and she seemed to have mouthed the word "Jerk"...referring to JM of course. I don't know if that's been confirmed, and if it was loud enough for a, or several Jurors to hear

Red BM = Very interesting. I had not heard that. I wonder if this has been confirmed.

 

[annmarie62]

Both my kids have superior IQ's, my daughter's is 135 and my son is 120 iirc, I never put much stock in IQ scores. The IQ's were done in school and they were admitted to the gifted program in middle school. I let my daughter do it (big mistake) and I did not allow my son in the program as I thought it was a waste and very stressful on the kids.

I don't consider either of them superior in any way, lol. Both are smart in ways but not smart in many ways. Both are creative, music and art and very good writers but in other ways totally just like every other 20 something. My daughter does suffer from Bipolar disorder which she was diagnosed a few years ago.

I do not believe the TH's stating that because of her "superior" IQ (as if she was a genius). Nope an IQ of 119 is not genius. Also they claim that with that IQ she would have planned it much better if she had premeditated it. I totally disagree with that, totally and completely.

I LOVE your honest descriptions of your kids! I used to teach Advanced Placement Language Arts/Literature and most of my students had IQs far superior to JAs; even so, probably only one or two were what I considered true intellectual geniuses( the type who would die before joining MENSA!) TRUE brilliance does not advertise itself; it just is. My oldest son, 24, is in grad school on full academic scholarship, has stacks of academic awards, and has always (diagnostically) tested w/in the "Gifted" range. However, he is shy to the point of being antisocial, indifferent to others' needs and very immature in his relationships with women. He is no JA- he wants to connect with people more and sometimes tries, but really, he's happiest in very small (tiny!) social circles; people and parties exhaust him. He suffers from depression and insomnia but he will still probably manage in life because of his intense focus on higher education. My other son is 14, hates school, artistically gifted and a born leader. He has tons of male and female friends and can "read" people in a split second. At 14, he understands and relates to women better than his big brother. He makes people want to hang around him. His IQ is average to a bit above-average but he has the social skills of a much older person. He loves life while his brother worries and *****es about everything. He, imo, will always be happier than his "brilliant" brother, and possibly more successful as well. Interesting that JA has no clue that many extremely gifted people suffer from a variety of mental health issues and socialization deficits. Not all, but it's there. She thought classifying herself as a genius meant that she was some sort of superman or goddess, wallowing in her own perfection. Because she has absolutely no, none, zero concept of true "genius."

 

[pinkfairy]

MOO, If we have any questions whether the jury will waver in convicting of LWOP or DP, I would imagine all they will have to do is look at Travis' neck wound and it will all be over for JA.

And I truly believe Juan's closing arguments will tie it all together leaving no question unanswered.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Just pointing out that 32 years old IS very, very young for a testifying "expert." Most experts are at least in their 40's and usually in their 50's and older. The idea being that one is not an expert until they've had quite a bit of practical experience and become established in their field. I didn't watch the testimony yesterday, so this isn't a commentary on how this witness did, at all. Just sayin'...I'm seeing posters get onto the defense for pointing out her age and lack of practical experience, but that IS what makes one an expert -- among other things. Any defense in any case would do this and it would be justified since experience is something the jury should definitely consider in evaluating an expert's testimony. Imo, particularly in a highly interactive and subjective field such as psych. All jmo.

Psychology is a science & what she's being asked to do is evaluate JA. This is a standard practice--interview & administer tests. I don't think it takes 30 years of experience to apply scientific inquiry and interpret tests. ALV was NOT an expert, and she did not do any objective tests or interviews. Dr. D was not paid $30,000 to render an opinion that even laypeople find unbelievable. JMO

 

[bznbear]

Despite being 32 yo, DD projected maturity and command of the applicable facts in her field. ALV and Samuels, both 65+ yrs. old, are two generations away from the sexual mores, social media, IT technology, etc. of today. Both relied on personal, subjective input provided by Jodi, ALV even ignoring what Jodi herself wrote in her journals in favor of ALV derived "context". I love the contrast, and think DD was a brilliant choice by JM.

Regardless their age, samuels and ALV could be just as in-tune and current in their fields, if they chose to. I think sometimes people become complacent, content to rest on their laurels, so to speak.

Ego may also play a part in their choice to remain stuck in their views, as well as bias. Personality can definitely play into decisions people make, and samuels and ALV decided to take the paths they did. Both are fully competent to grow educationally and professionally, imo.

 

[G&AMom]

Wilmott, it's not about the length of the resume, it's about the quality of the work. You will not shake DeMarte's credibility

I think JW had to ask about DeMarte's CV and try and punch holes in it, because JM had done that to both her expert witnesses. He pointed out the importance of actually looking at what was on their resumes and what it meant. If JW had ignored that, she would have made it clear that she knew DeMarte's CV was unassailable. It was pointless, but JW had to do it. JMO

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I think that she is a extremely qualified, hard working, knowledgeable doctor. She also has been in contact with the DT before and who knows what occurred in these contacts. She also has had her home invaded, burglarized in which her work laptop was taken in which law enforcement has deemed suspicious. She would have to have some raw feelings, she is human after all. I think she is doing a wonderful job and is showing much more restraint than ALV or DS. She hasn't spouted how dare you sir nor has answered any of JW questions in a condescending manner. In fact it seemed as though she started to actually feel bad for JW's stammering, bumbling manner. Also she has interviewed the worse of the worse in her career and has had to master the ability to set the tone of who is in charge. I think she is doing a good job in maintaining an even strain. <----The Right Stuff

I think DD recognized that JW was exhibiting the fact that she was at an intellectual disadvantage.

 

[nursebeeme]

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #139

there is a post that has the ALV video

I cannot recall exactly which part of testimony Juan made the Jerk comment yesterday however... (I did post wenwe4's transcripts in the timeline thread... so you could perhaps check there?)

here it is (from transcript):

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9249996&postcount=1344"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - *graphic and adult content* Jodi Arias Trial media/ timeline thread **no discussion**[/ame]

snip:

is there such a things being a jerk?
not using that verbage

 

[Boodles]

I have been trying to find where LaViolette calls Martinez "JerK" under her breath and can't locate it, if anyone who is more savvy at this kind of thing can help me out I'd appreciate it! AND the part where Martinez makes the "JerK" comment yesterday. I am terrible at remembering which testimony comes on what days! THANKS!!

Oh WOW! I didn't connect Juan's comment to the alleged ALV jerk incident. I didn't think she said 'jerk,' I thought she just moved her mouth.

Is that why he used that word yesterday? If so, very clever!!

 

[DAWN TREADER]

I absolutely agree with Dr. DeMarte's diagnosis of BPD for Jodi Arias and believe the autopsy report and crime scene evidence support a premeditated hate filled rage slaughter.

 

[kaera]

I don't think it hurts that Dr. D is pleasing to the eye either. I am not trying to sound sexist but considering how Mikey gave her a big smile like he did I am sure the male jurors aren't having a whole lot of trouble giving her attention either. Do u think so too KCL? Beauty and brains. Wow. I would love to know her IQ.

It took me awhile to realize why she seemed so familiar looking. I finally got it, Heather Locklear with dark hair... Anyone else see it?!

 

[LambChop]

What is funny to me is that I don't see Dr. DeMarte as having lack of experience at all. Just because she got her doctrine in 2009, she began research back in 2004, almost 10 years ago.

Wilmott is a joke. I just watched the end of yesterday this morning as I was getting ready for work. DeMarte might have had slight 'tude but I don't blame her. They are so desperate and attacking her credentials and experience is going nowhere for them. The defense team is on Jodi's level of immaturity. It was amusing to watch.

I think the thing that stands out is that where she worked they immediately assigned her as their Director despite her young age. Plus she was supervising those who already had degrees. The more JW tried to discredit DD the better she looks. I think the comment about 1980 was made because that was the year DD was born and that is why she looks confused. She may not even be aware that this was the year ALV received her Masters.

 

[Softail]

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #139

there is a post that has the ALV video

I cannot recall exactly which part of testimony Juan made the Jerk comment yesterday however... (I did post wenwe4's transcripts in the timeline thread... so you could perhaps check there?)

I just don't see her calling him a jerk. To me it just looked like she pursed her lips, as part of her mannerism. :twocents:

 

[BunnyHop]

I like DD very much and think she is a great witness and did a good job with JM. However, I became a little nervous when JW did her cross. Everyone knows JW was going to go after her about the length of her experience. She should have been prepared for this. She seemed nervous and a little combative on her answeres. True she does not have 30 yrs experience, but she should be proud of her studies and the years she does have and supply her answers with more confidence.

I have been at my job for 20 years. I have not done anything amazing in that 20 years. I have a director that started fresh out of college and moved up in my company in 4 years. Its not the years its what you learn in those years.

I think she handled herself perfectly. :rocker:

 

[especiallyheather]

Another thing is at one point she said she didn't want to pay the high gas prices in Southern California yet that is exactly where she filled up the gas cans. Then she says she didn't want to get gas in NV or UT. She has another fill-up-the-gas cans in SLC, however.

On HLN they are also illustrating how far she went off the direct route from Southern California to Utah by diverting to AZ, the one place with no receipts.

:liar:

Reallly far behind, so I apologize if this has been asked and answered in previous threads.

If she admits to being in Mesa,Az & openly admits to the killing, why not admit to the third gas can? Its like, in one breath she is saying I never went to Mesa because you cant prove I had three gas cans, yet in another she is saying she was the one who was at his house and murdered him?

I just don't get the logic, or the need to lie about something so trivial (I know, it's Jodi). She openly admits she was in Arizona and that she murdered him....

:abnormal:

 

[YESorNO]

I can just picture ALV reading text messages from TA where he uses abbreviations like OMG, SMH, LMAO etc. and thinking "wow, he is so full of rage that he is 'typing in tongues'. Perhaps he is so angry he is just pounding random keys."

BBM :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh: