trial day 50: REBUTTAL; #153

[pferrin]

I think without a doubt she harmed animals, faked pregnancies and scared her exes. Something in her background is there - seething with rage. Her parents were aware of it, and it's just odd her exes aren't opening up regarding it. If you watch her in the video with TA where she's laying all over him (not unusual) she looks bored, upset and "OVER IT" as she flips her hair and rolls her eyes. She doesn't like him getting attention. I'm thinking she was very rude and very cold when she wasn't getting all the attention.

I know TA comes from a rough background and given the people that are attracted to me - I know I seem to attract people with rough childhoods who are hyper sexual or had past addiction issues. For whatever reason that goes well with BPD people. Maybe something in her reminded him of his mother and all he ran from? But at the same time it was oddly comforting. Just tossing out random things to understand what he saw in her and why he kept feeding into her insanity. Toxic relationships are gasoline on flames, and there's always signs it's toxic long before it gets ugly. By no means am I saying he deserved any of this - at all.

I thought you had written "scared her elves" lol. Must be getting tired

 

[atthelake]

Omg just turning on live with all the gunfire!

 

[RATTKATT]

is that the 'front shot' of jodi i've been hearing about?

 

[AstroKitty]

Oh wow, I finally remembered what I thought this different handwriting question from JW was about. It's to prove, if presented that Dr. Samuels or ALV wrote in the magazines and sent them to Jodi or she was getting a message out to Samuels or ALV. ha

wow. What all has she done? She's so sneaky and deceitful. Brazen because she has no morals.

 

[GoAskAllie]

She did nothing wrong. She doesn't decide what testimony to allow. The judge does, and she allowed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulamith *
There is no proof that JA stole a ring. Dr. DeMarte probably should have not brought the ring up in her testimony.
She did nothing wrong. She doesn't decide what testimony to allow. The judge does, and she allowed it.*

Quote:
TA had alot of Pre- Paid Legal and Family Home Evening people over at his house. TA had a number of roommates. These were not friends, only roommates. One is Zachary. He had access to the keys for Travis's bedroom. Zachary also said that the front door to Travis' house was never locked. TA had a roommate, John Hepworth who according to I think, Lisa Andrews, moved out suddenly, as TA and Hepworth did not see eye-to-eye. IIRC, another roomate of TA's was permitted to enter TA's bedroom and bathroom to obtain medication that was in TA's medicine chest. JA has admitted to murdering TA but as far as stealing a ring?? Any number of people could have snooped around and stolen the ring, IMO.


Right, just like any number of people could have stolen the grandparents' gun or slashed Travis's tires.

Re: the ring. Willmott immediately objected when Dr. D. initially mentioned the ring. A sidebar ensued and when it was over, JM was allowed to question her about the ring. I'd be willing to bet that there is a lot more to the ring story (evidence that points to Jodi) than what was discussed on Thursday. Also pretty certain it was Jodi who attempted to throw John Hepworth under the bus as a person who may have had an issue with Travis. His name came up during one of her early phone conversations with Detective Flores. The "didn't see eye-to-eye" comment sounds very familiar.

 

[Arishia]

The way I understand it is that JA was evaluated for PTSD, not for trauma. You cannot transfer your responses from what really happened to the fake (another) scenario, because the situation is different, the triggers and responses are different. So, basically, the test is invalidated by the lie (substitute scenario), because the trauma would be qualitatively different. Trauma is trauma, but your responses to any particular novel trauma are not predictable and not every trauma causes PTSD. So, in that sense, one instance is not the same as the other. Hence, the test for PTSD is invalid. There was no PTSD.

I agree with the exception of your last statement, "There was no PTSD."
Dr.D: Saying the PDS test is rendered invalid means it can't be used to support or rule out a diagnosis of PTSD. It doesn't mean it says she doesn't have it.
She reached her conclusion on PTSD wrt JA on other data and testing altogether.
(This whole path of the PSD test that the DT is leading people down is a logic trick.)
The facts are these:
1. The initial trauma event reported in the PSD test didn't happen, therefore the follow up questions about dreams of the event, uncontrollable thoughts of the event, avoiding situations associated with the event, inability to fall or stay asleep due to the event etc. never happened either.
2. This means the test says nothing about PTSD and JA.
3. At this point, JA could still have PTSD, but needs to be evaluated with other testing, and data that meets PTSD criteria.
4. Dr.D did an additional evaluation for PTSD, and JA did not pass the clinically significant threshold for a diagnosis of PTSD.

 

[Melanie]

:floorlaugh: You guys crack me up. I can't watch HLN. :floorlaugh:

First off, too many commercials.
Second, so staged.

If I can't watch it live, i'd rather watch court on youtube.

Me too -- I gave up watching on-line after the morning session and seeing JW try to copy Juan's line of crossing witnesses (huge fail). I'm only watching JM now on You-Tube.

Watching Jodi is interesting - she's mimicking Dr. D with her hair. Putting it behind her ears, bangs brushed to the side - taking off her glasses. No Jodi, you are no more like Dr. D than JW is like JM.

Juan starts about 37 minutes in.

[video=youtube;M8XEK-B6OOI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8XEK-B6OOI[/video]

MOO

Mel

 

[Sherazhad]

I feel that the juror questions today showed they are taking the case seriously & are really listening. I do have a feeling that 1 juror is unsure & is still willing to give JA the benefit of a doubt. The early questions show they haven't totally discounted that JA might be suffering from PTSD. JW does not strike me as a skilled attorney. The way she is trying to be more aggressive & saying ''right'' after everything is a little creepy, does she want to be a Martinez 'mini me'? On another note, I did a few of those online personality disorder tests & I scored high on all of them, a few were actual ones used to diagnose BPD. Do I think I have it? No, I think I scored pretty high on some areas of it, because I have recently lost 2 close members of my family & am anxious about losing others. I also know though, that I feel huge empathy (perhaps too much) & have a very stable home & work life. I guess what I'm saying is depending on where you are in your life, perhaps the test JA is given is not 100 percent accurate. BPD sufferers are more often violent to themselves than others & JA seems to be more of a sociopath . Just my opinion, I am in no way an expert like Dr DeM.

 

[Steely Dan]

Well I can't sleep. I took 10 mg. of Ambien 2 hours and 15 minutes ago. Yes, I am aware I'm posting this. I think. Well here's my latest masterpiece.

[video=youtube;GbchoNyo40s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbchoNyo40s[/video]

 

[AstroKitty]

Well I can't sleep. I took 10 mg. of Ambien 2 hours and 15 minutes ago. Yes, I am aware I'm posting this. I think. Well here's my latest masterpiece.

LOL I oh so know ambien moments and I'm envious. Just throwing some pharmacy info your way - they are changing the formulation on the generic so it has lower abuse rates. You may not be feeling it due to change if youre taking a generic. Teva is the worst next to qualifast.

 

[Steely Dan]

LOL I oh so know ambien moments and I'm envious. Just throwing some pharmacy info your way - they are changing the formulation on the generic so it has lower abuse rates. You may not be feeling it due to change if youre taking a generic. Teva is the worst next to qualifast.

Thanks, what's this latest topic about people being shot?

 

[elementary]

The cat fight between the ladies...LOL. When the whole "I don't want to mislead" exchange happened I noticed that Dr DeMarte did something that I picked up from a really great communicator (imo). And that was, as Wilmott's volume got higher and whiner in her frustration, Dr DeMarte brought voice down lower and lower. She knows how to push Wilmott's buttons.

A 'cat fight'? Oh please, I am offended by the thought. Why not a battle of intellects? Why is this somehow different from other intellectual challenges and battles? It can't be because they're female, can it?

 

[elementary]

I thought Demarte was good and her information was good as well - I'm glad there was an alternative presented to oppose the PTSD and battered woman diagnoses.

I think her diagnosis was correct and for many reasons beyond the ones that she specifically recited. I think, however, personality disorders are not all neat and clean when it comes to bright line diagnoses - and she could probably fit in other PD categories, or fit within the BPD NOS category, like Samuels found.

I also find it possible that she had some level of PTSD from the brutal ,violent act that she committed -- especially if she was expecting a rather clean shot to the head to do the trick.

I really don't think any of this has to do with finding Jodi guilty or not guilty, however, and even the PTSD is not related to the battered woman syndrome defense - it's just an explanation for her conveniently chunk of memory loss.

I don't agree. She's a psychopath, IMO. What she would feel is frustration, anger and rage because it didn't go as smoothly as she hoped. She is not capable of feeling traumatised in any meaningful way. I think she got off on it. She loved every slice and gouge and plunge. She was just mad that he didn't die according to plan.

 

[Steely Dan]

Found it: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/19/us/boston-area-violence/index.html

 

[Steely Dan]

A 'cat fight'? Oh please, I am offended by the thought. Why not a battle of intellects? Why is this somehow different from other intellectual challenges and battles? It can't be because they're femaie, can it?

Wooohooo! CAT fight!!! :cat:


Errr... I mean how deplorable. They need to respect chicks a lot more.

 

[elementary]

But don't you think she'd have to do a lot more to make a complete, thorough diagnosis? I do. I saw borderline as a starting point. And I thought she was really there to shoot down the DV and PTSD diagnoses. I don't know how much further she could go.

Borderline fits with motive. I believe it only scrapes the surface of JA's psychopathology. But it fits the crime, explains it to some extent, and gives the jury something concrete and understandable to hang their hats on. I think the strategy is brilliant.

 

[elementary]

But don't you think she'd have to do a lot more to make a complete, thorough diagnosis? I do. I saw borderline as a starting point. And I thought she was really there to shoot down the DV and PTSD diagnoses. I don't know how much further she could go.

Borderline fits with motive. I believe it only scrapes the surface of JA's psychopathology. But it fits the crime, explains it to some extent, and gives the jury something concrete and understandable to hang their hats on. I think the strategy is brilliant. It's an Occam's razor kind of approach.

 

[rose222]

Some points about the questions from jurors.

They did not grill Demarte about her relative lack of experience.

No questions about her BPD diagnosis. Shocker for me.

No questions about her saying that JA is not a battered woman. Another shocker. I expected at least one question about that.

No question about Demarte's opinion that Travis' anger was directly delated to JA's lies/snooping. I expected a question about whether Demarte believes that Travis' anger was justified etc.

No follow up questions. If the juror who asked about the bear/tiger was on JA's side ( as opposed to just asking critical questions) then there would have been follow up questions regarding that. No other follow up questions.

A small number of questions and no follow up tells me that this jury is on the prosecution's side. Remember they can be criticial of Demarte and still be on JM's side but I think this jury was impressed with Demarte.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I just watched the last part of the cross, and JW was a real embarrassment, trying to lecture JD on how to read psychology tests. When JD would offer to look up the meaning of a scale for her, JW wouldn't let her. Bad form.

"You think other psychologists don't use these scales?" Like JW knows better. She's a joke.

 

[rose222]

Oh and no questions about Walker not using the 6 point criteria anymore. She does still use it but the jury does not know and didn't care enough to ask. JW yacked so much about that and didn't get so much as one question regarding that. Poor JW. Not!