trial day 53: REBUTTAL; #161

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Look at the stress on Tanisha's husband face. He has been such a rock!

how true

he is a hero in my eyes...........so supportive and there everyday

hugs to harold:tyou::yourock:
 
I don't know why, but to me, but I "buy" premeditated murder if the gunshot came first and then it went wrong and she stabbed him, etc but to me a stabbing is more a crime of passion. Does anyone else see why I would think that?
I think premeditated murder has been proven regardless which weapon was used first. The gun went with her - even if she'd strangled him - the gun, hair dye, rental, gas cans, Ryan, etc. show premeditation.

(But I'm a knife first gal - who believes that was used first solely for sadistic intent.)

JMO

ETA: Crime of passion means, legally, someone snapping in the heat of the moment. Like Clara Harris, who ran over her husband repeatedly, after catching him at a hotel with his mistress.
 
I can't believe wilmott thinks she can argue against this science. Detailing what the bullet did is most likely NOT helping her client.
 
I don't know why, but to me, but I "buy" premeditated murder if the gunshot came first and then it went wrong and she stabbed him, etc but to me a stabbing is more a crime of passion. Does anyone else see why I would think that?

Because maybe you understand something different under crime of passion than the legal definition? Not trying to put words in your mouth here lol. But I believe this was a crime of passion in the sense that there was a lot of passion behind this killing. A lot of rage and hatred. And I bet every time she stabbed him felt good to her sick soul. I think shooting him in the head would've been too easy. She wanted to hurt him and have him suffer.

It wasn't a crime of passion in the sense that she acted impulsively in that moment because of something Travis did immediatly prior to her killing him.
 
Oh come on JA, push your hair back and show us your faux tears!
 
this is where I will be listening with only one ear and half my attention. I still steadfastly disagree with the ME and believe the gunshot was first followed by the slashing stabby banshee attack.

I do not believe JA went to the trouble of stealing a gun to bring to a premeditated stabbing. JMO
 
JW's trying to say that TA would have been able to yell, curse and chase JA after being shot through the brain with a .25 caliber slug.

Didn't happen.
 
Here she goes with tgis flores questions again

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
 
Let's ask him if he could TALK if he was shot first!!!!!

I mean, that's when he said "f'ing kill you B***" right???
 
She should be FORCED to look at these pictures :stormingmad:

These pictures don't bother her one bit. She asked the detective to see them. She is forcing herself NOT to look so the jury will think they bother her.
 
Jodi's nose may be red, but there is not a tear in her eye.
 
Not one tear from JA. Stone cold. Heartless. Psychopath.
 
I can't believe wilmott thinks she can argue against this science. Detailing what the bullet did is most likely NOT helping her client.

It is weird. I wish she would just sit down and give it up.
 
I have been watching JA closely, trying to see the real tears/running nose. I just don't see any at all. I think she is pretending (again).

I don't usually quote myself, but I just realized that JA keeping her hair hanging is purposeful -- she doesn't want the jury to see if she has any tears or not, just that she is wiping with the tissue. I really can't wait for verdict day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
1,689
Total visitors
1,799

Forum statistics

Threads
606,332
Messages
18,202,149
Members
233,813
Latest member
dmccastor
Back
Top