trial day 51: REBUTTAL; #158

[Curious Me]

So, court starts at 1:30 tomorrow, then there's Thursday, and no court on Friday. I'm starting to believe I work in the legal field. :giggle: I have quite a few cases now. Where's my paycheck?

This is a case about another Deanna (Ballman) and her unborn baby Mabel. There's
finally been an arrest in the case!
*ARREST* Deanna Ballman, 9 months pregnant, found dead after answering Craigslist ad - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

fftobed:

 

[wasnt_me]

I totally understand that you were asking because of the people on YouTube and you were wondering why that issue wasn't addressed. There are so many details in this case that it's hard to keep straight. I get mixed up sometimes too - glad I could help out on this one.

Thank you and bless you. I was totally weirded out by the youtubers and yeah, I had to start ruling out what they were talking about and it made me think of some of my own experiences with voids, etc. But that was only because I didn't want a hang up like that to become a problem in the jury room. But then it seemed my experiences with voids was getting called into question. But you are right. I'm so glad you see that. thanks!

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

I guess I'm not sensitive at all to that type of talk, so it doesn't bother me. I know other people are different, but the only way it would affect me is if the person actually DID call me those names and I felt ashamed. Otherwise, I'd be matter-of-factly saying, "No.....No....No..." to every question with no feeling about it.

But as I said, all people are different and I guess the mere mention of words like that in some people's presence would be disconcerting.

I think what struck me most with Nurmi's tactics on this was the fact that Deanna still cared for Travis as a dear friend and former lover. I got the feeling Nurmi was trying to make her relationshipo with Travis into something "dirty" when most of us saw it as a loving, caring relationship. It's not like she was Travis' one night stand.

 

[wasnt_me]

You really said "I can't blame Nurmi for doing a job that he's been forced by law to do" ??

Is he required by law to be a total azz, torment the Alexanders, and carp on any part of the memory and reputation of a man who was murdered brutally by his client.

OK - I promise I will skip these from now on. Just thinking of that EXCUSE makes me LIVID!

I never said any of that. The job is defending Jodi. Nothing else.

 

[kaydono]

BBM: I won't fault you for that, in fact, I like to see people here try to look at things objectively, whether I agree or disagree, or fall somewhere in the middle. You would make a good juror for your honesty in how you weigh things out on the scales of justice.

I learn more when someone states their opposing point of view, and has sound reasoning for having it. It allows me to look outside myself, and see things that I may have disregarded when formulating my own perspective. Do I sound like a Psychology textbook? If so, its not intentional. Its the way my brain is wired. hehehehehehe

 

[Gypsy Road]

And Deanna said she is a teacher's aide right? I can't help but wonder if any of her students will see that testimony. I know you can't shield them from everything, but I just hate that she had to be asked those questions on nat'l t.v. She's innocent in all this, yet anther victim of JA's. Makes me so mad!

 

[Really?]

It was more nasty the way he was questioning Deanna in the end....no pun intended.

The whole...Did he ________? Did he ______?

actually it was quite old at that point.:facepalm:

 

[wasnt_me]

I don't think that is a "fiber". I think that is part of a tassle, and the only tassle JA would have used would have been hanging off her store bought "B cups".

Thanks. Whatever your opinion of it is, JM said in court that it came from the pillows. Or at least he theorized that and the defense's excuse is that it came from the rope.

***Disclaimer, whether the rope exists isn't the point I'm making. Simply saying this is what the defense put forth.

 

[MaryNo]

Someone was attempting to login. Travis would have had his password, and it would have been successful - by process of elimination, I assume it was Jodi trying to get into his business again.

There's nothing more. That was it! There was activity on that computer at that time. Mike Melendez (computer forensics guy) has nothing else? I find that odd.

 

[MeeBee]

It was more nasty the way he was questioning Deanna in the end....no pun intended.

The whole...Did he ________? Did he ______?

actually it was quite old at that point.:facepalm:

I think the jury has to be over it by now. And if those one or two texts and the sex converstation is all they have on him then they have nothing. I mean he didn't even have *advertiser censored*. Travis was squeaky clean until it came to Jodi. Occam's razor.

 

[Juli]

Thank you for the reply - I really appreciate you taking the time to try to help me understand. However, I still do not.

I just cannot imagine someone being so prudish that they are unable to understand, and, forgive having sex before marriage.

Not having sex before marriage is best - teenagers are not typically emotionally matured to have a full understanding of sex (the beauty of such intimacy). Building both a mental and spiritual intimacy while refraining from sex is ideal. Refraining from sex before marriage prevents STDs, pregnancies outside of marriage, emotional anguish, ect.

Sex before marriage is a concept older than Moses. Adults look at teenagers - unmarried college students - ect. and know the mistakes of having sex before marriage. More than knowing the mistakes - know that sex before marriage is, simply, not worth it.

Still - adults in their 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and beyond for the most part, IMO, can look back at the time when they were young, unmarried, and knew everything. Youth is a time when there is an answer to every question, there is a better way for every activity, everything & anything is possible - Youth is often a time when adults are pitied, felt sorry for, and greatly dismissed.

Sex before marriage happens - it always has happened. Catholic young unmarried "kids" have sex before marriage - and keep receiving communion (just like the generation before them and the previous generation. Presbyterian young unmarried "kids" have sex before marriage - and continue going to Sunday Service (just like the generation before them and the previous generation).

Yes - IMO ideally a person should wait to have sex until after they are married. Does it make a person horrible if they fail to uphold this great advice - no.

In terms of this trial - I do not understand why the defense is concentrating so much on "Sex Before Marriage / Law of Chastity / The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints," as if this is the only religious group that teaches sex before marriage is a sin. It is a sin in the catholic church, judaism, presbyterian church, and all mainstream protestant churches.

I cannot imagine the religious backgrounds of this defense team to behave as though this "sex before marriage thing" is only applicable to the LDS Church.

I have never seen this approach by defense teams in other trials - going on and on about breaking a church rule (sex before marriage). I've never heard a catholic witness asked about having sex before marriage, did they confess or continue to take communion - I've never heard a presbyterian witness asked about having sex before marriage, and even though it is a sensitive topic, did they continue attending Sunday Service without speaking to the pastor about their sin.

A prude is one thing - a person that does not "get" sex before marriage would not be human. We are all sinners - we all fall short of the glory of god. This is why we have the God's grace.

Sex before marriage is not a crime - Travis Alexander having sex before marriage did not cause him to be slaughtered - Travis Alexander last minutes on Earth scared gasping for air feeling his body not working because Arias had butchered him did not happen because Travis Alexander had sex before marriage.

Travis Alexander was murdered by Arias (it has nothing to do with having sex before marriage) - Travis Alexander was tortured we know during the last minutes of his life due to Arias' criminal behavior. Travis Alexander had his life taken away from him - all of his hopes, dreams, his pursuit of happiness, getting married, having children, becoming a husband, father, and grandfather. Arias had no right to take Travis Alexander's life - more so, Arias took Travis Alexander's life in the most brutal way that she could.

It makes me so sad - especially seeing Arias smile during court - seeing Arias' drawing (Travis cannot do anything because Arias murdered him). Arias' behavior should be solemn during her trial for the murder she confessed to - instead Arias "rubs" it in that she is alive and free to do what she pleases. It is as though Arias receives joy each minute during her trial knowing that she murdered Travis Alexander - Arias seems satisfied knowing that she took Travis Alexander's life away. Arias smiled when Deanna Reid was on the stand - a smirk that illustrated, "I'm (Arias) the only one that knows what happened to Travis Alexander - Travis Alexander will never date/marry become a father, and, I (Arias) could not be happier."

For the defense to pretend as though sex before marriage is not a fundamental religious belief within the main religious community is odd. Again, refraining from sex before marriage is taught in the catholic church, presbyterian church, jewish temple, and the numerous protestant churches.

Arias is a cold blooded murderer. The longer this trial goes on - the more I believe that Arias decided that she would murder Travis Alexander early in their relationship - Arias decided that if Travis Alexander ever really tried to get away from her she would murder him. I think that she thought about it for years - not weeks - especially since she stabbed him almost 30 times, slit his throat from ear to ear, and shot him in the face.

I apologize for this "rant." I am really confused as to why this defense is behaving as though sex before marriage is an "out there" concept. I do not understand why this defense is going on and on about sex - asking Deanna Reid about her sexual past. Sex outside of marriage has nothing to do with the murder of Travis Alexander - Travis Alexander was murdered by a cold blooded killer that IMO, again, plotted/thought/fantasized about Travis Alexander's murder for years (given the brutally of Travis Alexander's murder).

The DT is attempting a character assassination tactic because they have nothing else to go on. They keep harping on premarital sex only because they want to portray TA as a person leading a double life.

It's ridiculous, ITA. First of all, most people do not go around blabbing about their sex life, especially to people they attend church with. That's not leading a double life; it's just common sense.

Secondly, the DT wants to portray JA as some shrinking violet who didn't know what was and what wasn't allowed in the Mormon faith as if she didn't know - big eye roll - to show that TA was leading a double life but not JA - she just didn't know right from wrong. Again, a big eye roll. The fact remains that JA claimed she was a Christian and had the Bible, along with the Book of Mormon, listed on her MySpace page to indicate her faith. No Christian faith condones premarital sex, so her claim of being ignorant to what is and what is not appropriate Christian behavior, even within her own religion, is a big lie.

Lastly, who in their right mind changes their religion for a guy within 2 month's time other than a person who is desperate to snag somebody? JA didn't give a rat's azz about religion when it came to her sex life. To now claim that she was ignorant of the law of chastity is nothing but a smoke screen to avoid dealing with the truth that JA was just as "nasty" in the bedroom as the next person.

Really now, it's amazing that Nurmi and JW are attempting to define virtue to the jury when their own client has slaughtered somebody. What religion is that acceptable in, or didn't their shrinking violet client know that murder was a sin? Foolishness!

 

[kaydono]

Thanks. Whatever your opinion of it is, JM said in court that it came from the pillows. Or at least he theorized that and the defense's excuse is that it came from the rope.

***Disclaimer, whether the rope exists isn't the point I'm making. Simply saying this is what the defense put forth.

I take it you are watching HLN? I have it playing in the background on my computer and was listening to Vinnie get all excited about the tassels. I cannot see Vinnie but I am picturing him jumping around like a bunny rabbit. He gets soooo excited.. gotta love Vinnie. That one Linda lawyer lady is on there tonight. I cannot remember her full name but I detested her during the CA trial.

 

[dani]

Also, wouldn't there still be some record of return when the can was scanned back into the system?

I agree, and the odds are that at least half of the jurors have shopped at Walmart and had to make a return. They will know what the process is and "edify" the ones that don't. :twocents:

 

[Tsunvirtual]

Methinks Nurmi made a big mistake with Deanna today. It was just wrong on so many levels.

Whatever happened to honor? You can do a distasteful job without being disgusting and mean. I hope the jury holds it against him. Deanna was a victim of Jodi's by proxy today. Thanks to Nurmi's verbal assault.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

I agree Juli, one of DT's biggest mistakes was trying to convince the jurors that JA was the next Mother Teresa, now that package is completely falling apart it casts doubtnot only anything from JA's lips or writings, but also anything from DT in general. They should have NEVER tried to portray JA in a holier than thou light to start with.

 

[wasnt_me]

The difference lies in the fact that Juan goes after those who lie or refuse to testify in full honesty with a pit bull approach, where Nurmi went on a vulgar attack with a non threatening young lady who was answering questions honestly. :stormingmad:

I, for one, wanted to know the answers to Nurmi's questions. I actually wanted to know if Deanna and Travis had had sex, and I was surprised that JM didn't bring it up on direct. I figured he was going to let the DT do it because they were insisting that Travis wasn't really a virgin before Jodi.

I'm VERY glad they asked Deanna these questions because we learned that Travis wasn't professing to be a virgin. He just wasn't divulging information either way.

Nurmi's questions, though some think they are vulgar, did this for me. It showed me that Travis knew how to be in a loving, respectful sexual relationship with a woman, and it made me think that he didn't do that stuff with Deanna because he respected her and because she didn't show herself to be the type of woman who'd be into that.

That led me to conclude either of three things--Jodi corrupted Travis, Travis changed sexually after Deanna, or Travis only did that stuff with Jodi because that was what Jodi wanted.

I tend to think the last conclusion is the best one. So while I wasn't offended by the testimony, Deanna did seem uncomfortable, and I do appreciate her answering those questions to prove that Travis was actually mentally healthy sexually. AND he wasn't after children.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Someone was attempting to login. Travis would have had his password, and it would have been successful - by process of elimination, I assume it was Jodi trying to get into his business again.

Melendez didn't say anything about someone trying to log in, just that there was activity at 4:54pm. He didn't recall the activity.

 

[kaydono]

It broke my heart today to see Travis's brother openly crying. He and Harold have seemed, to me, as the anchors for the rest of them. Today Steven, the brother, looked so broken.

 

[wasnt_me]

BBM: I won't fault you for that, in fact, I like to see people here try to look at things objectively, whether I agree or disagree, or fall somewhere in the middle. You would make a good juror for your honesty in how you weigh things out on the scales of justice.

Thanks. I appreciate that. Someone had asked earlier why I was in the defense camp. I guess my reply got removed, but I felt I had to put a disclaimer on it from here on out.

 

[dani]

I take it you are watching HLN? I have it playing in the background on my computer and was listening to Vinnie get all excited about the tassels. I cannot see Vinnie but I am picturing him jumping around like a bunny rabbit. He gets soooo excited.. gotta love Vinnie. That one Linda lawyer lady is on there tonight. I cannot remember her full name but I detested her during the CA trial.

Her name is Linda Kinny Baden. She was pro defense and obnoxious as heck in the CA trial, but she seems to be leaning pro prosecution this time around, so I'm giving her a pass. Besides, the jury doesn't get to hear what she's saying, or maybe I should say the jury SHOULDN'T be hearing what she's saying.