trial day 50: REBUTTAL; #153

[LambChop]

Can anyone explain the question about the handwriting?? That went over my head.


And did anyone besides me love when JW put the journal entry from 1/24/08 on the big screen and showed us JA's beautiful handwriting a mere 2 days after mean ol' TA broke her finger?

And she mentioned finger re: "I can't quite put my finger on it". If he broke her finger wouldn't that have been a reminder???? Something like" "Oh, and speaking of finger I think my finger is broken." Nada

 

[artsy1]

As far as the camera in the washer, I have my own theory.

JA portrays herself as a "professional photographer", yet by her own testimony, she claimed that she and TA couldn't figure out how to work his camera to do the alleged sex video that is supposed to be on her cell phone instead.

So, my thought is, that if his camera was too elaborate for her to figure out where the card was in a moment when she was frantic to clean up and get out before the roommates started coming home from work, she figured that the camera & card would get ruined in the washer.

IMHO, she didn't take the camera with her, because if someone saw it in a dumpster or found it in the desert, a stranger might take it and find out what was on the camera, since it was expensive, and the jig would be up. Safer bet was to throw it in the washer and hope that the water destroyed all the evidence.

 

[Aliz488]

Can anyone explain the question about the handwriting?? That went over my head.


And did anyone besides me love when JW put the journal entry from 1/24/08 on the big screen and showed us JA's beautiful handwriting a mere 2 days after mean ol' TA broke her finger?

Dr samuels gave Jodi a test that was to be hand written and answered by her not answered by him. He filled it out and when he scored the test he came up with 3 different scores. Some said she had ptsd and some said like DR. D diagnose BPD. When the examiner fills out the test they can easily put answers down that help the person being examined to come up with the diagnosis to help their side of the case, thus rendering them BAISED!!!

 

[MeeBee]

While I personally am not an expert, my GD's therapist defined BPD as the female equivalent of Anti-social personality disorder.

That is extremely innaccurate.

 

[AstroKitty]

I don't think there was bedding in the washing machine.

Looks like she threw bleach in there. His bedroom and closet as well as the bathroom was meticulous. I don't think he would throw bleach on his things, she did that.

I'm truly wondering if she took a shower while he bled out, and then she used that towel and put it on the floor to move him in the shower where she shot him? I have constantly wondered how she moved him (adrenaline only goes so far). Didn't the murder take 3 minutes? Or was it longer?

 

[popsicle]

http://www.ustream.tv/cbsnews?utm_campaign=t.co&utm_source=522594&utm_medium=social

CALIFORNIA: WATCH LIVE - MAN ENTERS RESTAURANT AND SHOUTS 'I HAVE A BOMB'. BOMB SQUAD ON SCENE.

 

[Ransom]

I had not, and at first assumed it was the CTR ring to which NG was referring....and I KNEW that was false since that ring was on the counter next to TA's wallet.

Afterwards, I just took the rest of the screeching with a giant salt lick.

TA's wallet was in his office.

 

[Truth Detector]

I have said that about 50 times in as many threads. lol

I think she put it down on the bed while she was rushing around and forgot about it. I think it was entangled in the sheets when she yanked the bedding from the bed and when she went back for it (who knows why ... maybe to remove the memory card she realized she'd forgotten) she couldn't find it and had no time left to do a thorough search.

She figured she'd deleted the photos and that would have to be good enough.

This comports precisely with the defendant's version of events which she recounted for the jury in answer to a juror's question; i.e., "I have no memory of putting the camera in the washer."

Which is precisely why I don't believe it for a second.

 

[nursebeeme]

I've probably missed something but it's not that hard for me to see how a murderer would have PTSD. That's not to say I believe in the fog and I will be very happy when justice for Travis finally prevails but I don't think having PTSD and guilty of Murder1 are necessarily completely exclusive.

ETA I was too busy screen shotting to hear DD's answer to can a murder cause PTSD at 08:25. Based on that, I see how people don't want it to be possible for JA to have PTSD http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDO0bqaIbmk

I am just catching up here (thank you for the questions!)

1) this jury seems to be questioning ALV and Samuels: not Dr. D's findings. Imhoo they wanted her opinion on what she thought of Dr. S testing practices. They seemingly did NOT like his hand filling in of answers (did you all see the yellow overhead??? that is NOT PROFESSIONAL NOR A WAY TO ADMINISTER A TEST:twocents: and this jury knows it.. they wanted her opinion)


2) Not ONE domestic violence question (I believe they had 127 for Alyce LaV after Juan dismantled her)

3) Dr. D's background: umm imhoo this relates EXACTLY back to LaV who could not even recall when she last testified in court or worked on a forensic case. Dr. D estimated her forensic total at 75

4) This TS1 2 3 129, etc, whatever. She said that she does not even use the test based on research~ The jury gets that.

5) Tiger/bear thing/question: this answered (imhoo most likely) a question from a juror that maybe possibly has ptsd or knows someone who does and has not previously asked questions before but wants to understand more about the issue about this (re: trauma: if arias was traumatized by "a" why would changing it to "b" change the test results. I am not concerned at all. The answer was astounding.

6) Juan rocked on his review of questions: short, simple.

7) Wilmott got up to discuss questions and had no salient points so aimed for a faux hail mary and failed miserably.

:twocents::twocents::twocents::twocents:

 

[LambChop]

I couldn't figure out the basis of the bear vs tiger question but I'm not sure it really matters. Dr. D. was very clear the whole way through her testimony that she considers the source of the stressful event and the subsequent answers about that source to be valid only when linked and as a real occurrence. Meaning: if the test taker has lied then she ipso facto considers it an invalid test result and cannot be used.

I don't know whether that constitutes impartiality but she was consistent in her belief that one type of stressor cannot be substituted for another and have a valid test result.

If you were truly stress from trauma it's not likely you would think to lie.

 

[Madeleine74]

PTSD doesn't excuse the killing of TA. Fauxg doesn't excuse the killing. BPD doesn't excuse the killing of TA. There is nothing any of the experts testified to that is a valid defense for JA on why she killed T.A.

Further, Juan will be able to tell the jury during closing arguments that the burden to prove the killing was due to JA defending her own life was solely Jodi's and she failed to prove she had any reasonable fear of her life being in danger or that she used reasonable force to save her life.

It was a big fat ZILCH on all measures. Her life wasn't in danger, she preplanned and premeditated the murder, it was indeed murder in the first degree, and she is guilty.

< /game over >

 

[nursebeeme]

I've probably missed something but it's not that hard for me to see how a murderer would have PTSD. That's not to say I believe in the fog and I will be very happy when justice for Travis finally prevails but I don't think having PTSD and guilty of Murder1 are necessarily completely exclusive.

ETA I was too busy screen shotting to hear DD's answer to can a murder cause PTSD at 08:25. Based on that, I see how people don't want it to be possible for JA to have PTSD http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDO0bqaIbmk

oh and I am watching this again for good measure. what a way to end the day before a long weekend.

:rocker::rocker:

 

[tlcya]

I am still on the fence about the camera. I think she was all in a panic. Things hadn't gone according to plan, there was this huge mess. She is cut, bleeding, there is DNA to be concerned with. She was so superior that she really did not plan for the cleanup involved in a non shower contained death. I think she could have in her panic simply mistakenly dropped the camera in.

Or maybe, she was concerned that people would instantly know it was missing from the scene and think photography - Jodi.

If the camera was purposefully put in the washer I feel it had her blood on it.

 

[sandcastles4me]

Does anyone know who the next witness will be?

 

[bznbear]

That is extremely innaccurate.

Well, then we agree to disagree.

 

[Rosebud1952]

I have a question: Can the DT call Jodi on rebuttal? JW and JA seem to be gearing up for something, writing lots and lots of notes, so I am wondering, Are these notes to requestion JA at some point? Why else would they be writing all these notes?

 

[Southern_Meadow]

It wasn't. Towel (matching the one on his towel bar in the photos ... rust/orange color/salmon (lol)), t-shirt, socks, camera, etc. NO bedding.

I think the bedding was in the dryer, right?

 

[writer7]

{Taking the hug}
Have you seen the test? It looked like just true/false to me.

I looked it up during that testimony and read about scoring it, etc. I can't remember the exact name is why I'm hesitant to say it's definitely the same test we're talking about.

But if it's the one JA lied about the event on, yep, I've seen it and read it all. It has sections for short 'essay' type answers, not quantitative ones. But those are also counted and scored numerically, so the score doesn't take into consideration the quality of the answers (that I noticed). It's a frequency count (she has 3 of 5 possible symptoms...)

The professional should take the quality of those answers into consideration, though. That's why lay people aren't really supposed to take those tests alone, because they don't know what all to look for that is qualitative and meaningful.

Dr Samuels acting as if it was a totally quantitative test means he shirked his professional duty, imho. The test wouldn't have folks write out answers if the written parts weren't important to consider. He was right that, technically, the numerical score doesn't matter if the trauma was different. That's not very professional, but it is technically true -- like bad statistics, lol.

 

[hindsight2020]

Then I don't think your fear would qualify as PTSD - more like fear of all animals, or all wild animals, or something like that. At any rate, you wouldn't be responding to the specific animal that caused your fear.

IIRC, Jodi said on (Samuels') test, that the incident was cuased by a stranger so it follows that she should experience PTSD when she is among strangers. Travis was hardly a stranger.

Who lies about about the source of their trauma assuming they were ever traumatized?
Besides that, if you are sexually assaulted by a large hairy man you will experience different trauma than if you were trapped in a car after a lethal accident with your child dying in the back seat.
That's why the same questions on the test do not apply to all trauma. They are scored with consideration to the incident. In real life people take the test because they want help and then receive therapy. In JA's life, real trauma is secondary to creating a defense. If she had real trauma, she be seeing someone for it IMO. She is after all presumed innocent and has 2 lawyers and a mitigation specialist plus 2 experts who all seem to agree she didn't need 'help' in jail. Per JA to the jury, she has no mental health problems.

Thanks guys, in helping to make sense of this bear/tiger juror question.. I am going to listen to the juror questions/ testimony again, as we have a loong trial break this weekend.

 

[Mykeru]

Anyone who thinks Dr. D. drank a lot of water has nothing on a witness from the Brad Cooper murder trial--a classmate of BC's was on the stand and he drank and crunched ice the entire time. He must have gone through a gallon of water in his hour on the stand. And when he wasn't drinking water he was noisily crunching ice in his mouth. Afterwards he practically ran out of the courtroom, in relief to be off the stand and probably to get to the men's room stat. He was painful to watch--I've never seen someone drink that much water in that short amount of time.

Why is everyone on Janeen DeMarte like she has some sort of drinking problem?

If you watch Dr. Demarte closely, and let me tell you, I have (but, I digress...in my bunk), you will notice she pours a little bit of water into those fancy styrofoam cups and sips it.

At worst she's just using the cup and water carafe as a prop to give herself something to do, because I can't imagine answering Wilmott's questions-in-search-of-a-point is particularly engaging.

I mean, really, if one of your "data points" for criticism is that someone testifying (in Phoenix, go figure) is sipping too much water you 1. Have very little of relevance to say and, therefore 2. are probably Dr. Drew.