trial day 50: REBUTTAL; #152

[gauntlet]

I had to take another screen shot. My computer is just too happy to see him back.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Did Jodi steal his ring?

 

[Breezy1]

Is he trying to get her to mention the tires... Was that door opened? Please oh pleasseeee!

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

DDemarte may know that JA is going to kill again and is being as honest as she can professionally be to keep someone safe.

 

[Curious Me]

Dr. mentions Jodi stealing Travis's ring!

 

[Sustained]

With all of these sidebars, the court ought to have a bar on the side for those not participating in the sidebar ...

 

[Charterhouse]

What Miss Wilmott should have learned from today is get Dr. D card to use as an expert witness.

 

[BritsKate]

Although I don't think Travis abused Jodi verbal abuse is real and I personally think it can be very severe. Just because this case presents it in a bad way doesn'tmean it isn't a very difficult thing to go through.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

I really don't believe many here would dispute that. Being abusive and an abuser are worlds apart though, in my opinion.

I honestly believe this case is a prime example of just how lethal psychological abuse can become and I believe Jodi exhibits many traits and behaviors common to an abuser. It doesn't make Travis' texts any more palatable - but when one places them in the context of being victim to psychological abuse and manipulation, to include stalking and intrusive actions invading his privacy time and time again, even from a distance - I can't say I wouldn't have reacted the same. If not much worse. (I know I did react much, much worse towards my disordered, abusive ex when he was stalking me and I was terrified of him. But I was so desperate for him to just go away already what he might do to me was almost an afterthought to my anger.)

JMO and FWIW

 

[snowshuze]

Well that answers the question about the ring.

 

[gitana1]

Nurmi openly laughing at JD's responses. That is not proper courtroom conduct and the Judge should put a stop to such unprofessional conduct. :furious:

I want to repost Minor4th wonderful posts on the subject:

Originally Posted by minor4th
General comments to keep in mind while watching this trial:

1. Perjury -- Witnesses lie and exaggerate on the stand ALL THE TIME, literally in every single trial there is a witness who lies or exaggerates on the stand. Witnesses also make mistakes about the facts they testify about, and sometimes their memory is faulty and they may not remember something accurately. None of those things is perjury, and even if a witness is outright lying -- it is extremely rare for someone to be charged with perjury because most of the time the witness can explain a discrepancy in their testimony due to memory issues or misspeaking, etc.

Perjury is a crime only when the witness knowingly lies under oath and it can be proven by comparing it to a previous written or recorded statement. And usually it has to be a lie that is material to the case on an important issue. Think Mark Furman.

2. Courtroom behavior -- Each judge is responsible for the rules of decorum in their own court. Some judges do not allow any food or drink or gum, other judges allow it. If the judge allows it, it is not disrespectful to the court to eat, drink, or chew gum.

Some judges require that attorneys keep their knees and feet off counsel table, and other judges dont require it. If the judge doesn't require it, it's not disrespectful to have your knee resting on counsel table (although as a practical matter, it looks bad and unprofessional).

Some judges and courts require electronics to be surrendered before entering a court room. Some require that all electronics be turned off. Some only require that they be silenced and even allow internet and email use in the courtroom. Whatever the particular rules are, the attorneys are generally allowed to have their phones, ipads, laptops on.

Some judge allow people in the gallery to take notes, others don't.

This particular judge apparently has pretty lax rules about court room decorum. That does not mean she does not have control of her courtroom or that she is not respected. it simply means she doesn't care about those things and does not feel like the administration of justice is compromised by people eating, drinking, chewing gum, etc in the gallery.

3. Control of the witnesses/attorneys -- I've seen so many comments and questions about how a witness can be allowed to testify the way they are or how can an attorney be allowed to ask certain questions or ask to approach so many times or how can Jodi be allowed to smile at jurors or send notes to her mother, etc. The simple answer is that whether something is allowed or not there is no way to prevent it from happening in advance -- the only way to deal with it is if someone complains and gets a ruling after the fact.

The judge can only rule on things that are brought to her attention within the legal process and what she observes with her own eyes. She removed someone from the courtroom for sleeping the other day - that is something she saw herself and corrected it. If a witness is answering inappropriately, the opposing lawyer has the opportunity to make his objections and get a ruling or instruction from the judge. If that doesn't correct the problem, there's an opportunity for the lawyer to object again and get another ruling and instruction.

It would take something really egregious for a judge to hold a witness in contempt -- rudeness, interrupting, going beyond the scope of the question is not going to do it. Contempt is an extreme remedy that is reserved for behavior that cannot be cured by any other means. A judge is not going to hold a lawyer in contempt because he or she asks to approach every thirty seconds or even because he or she goes beyond the bounds of a pre-trial ruling because these things can all be solved in other ways. The last thing the judge would want to do is hold a lawyer in contempt in front of the jury or even admonish the lawyers too strongly in front of the jury because it could be prejudicial and cause a mistrial or be grounds for appeal.

I do not believe this judge has no control over her courtroom - in fact, the opposite. What many see as a circus atmosphere is due to the defense attorneys acting in a squirrelly or sneaky way, and Juan is just not a prosecutor who makes a lot of objections or makes a big deal out of everything that he possibly could. Most prosecutors do not object a lot -- and most defense lawyers do not act as squirrelly as the ones in this case.

The judge's primary job in this case is to make sure that Jodi Arias gets a fair trial. Anything and everything else is secondary.

Originally Posted by minor4th
4. Impeachment - impeaching a witness is a concept, not an event. To impeach a witness simply means to present evidence that undermines the witness' credibility. There is not a hearing to determine if a witness is impeached; there is no declaration that a witness is impeached; and there is no jury instruction that defines whether a witness has been impeached or not.

The jury is the sole fact finder and the sole determiner of how much weight and credibility to give each piece of evidence and testimony. There will be jury instructions that the jury can decide to believe or disbelieve any, all or none of a witness' testimony. The jury is allowed to use common sense and their everyday life experience to determine whether to believe any testimony. Even if there is no contradictory testimony on an issue, the jury can still choose not to believe it based on the demeanor of the witness and common sense.

 

[makayla]

Someone please chart Wilmott's rage and aggression right now...

:furious:

off the charts!!!

 

[wenwe4]

report JA took TA's ring?
yes

indication some emails were deleted
objection - overruled

JA was accused of doing that
objection - no proof
approach

 

[minor4th]

New info:

Jodi took Travis' ring...

Jodi deleted Travis' emails

 

[twocuriouscats]

Keep saying "STALKING" Juan! Go for it!

 

[grammieto5]

Does anyone else think Nurmi is laughing because of JM's tone as opposed to laughing at DD? Or is this a table for one?

YEP! I do believe he was

 

[Ari]

Constant approaches when Juan is up.

 

[Rosemary Pierce]

Unbelievable. Please stop this madness.

 

[lil_buddy]

FINALLY!!! I know JA deleted all types of stuff and it has not been mentioned once.

 

[TexMex]

Online snooping and theft of a ring = aggressive

 

[MistyM]

I suspect she is very high maintenance. She appears to have a personal shopper since her jewelry always coordinates with her clothing (and she could not possibly have time to shop) - she has a ton of expensive suits tailored to fit her, and seems to get fresh manicures once or twice a week.

this is true, but why is her hair very dry and frizzy, it should be styled much more professionally.