Trial day 53: REBUTTAL; #162

[megmono]

never realized that the daft punk song is also the song kanye uses for his song stronger. learned something new today.

 

[TexMex]

Ugh,,the pages will not load here for me. You all can't leave me know!!!!!

Slow on my iPad too

Guess its time to go start the chicken and dumplings

 

[Chelly]

thats what i thought when i first seen them and went and had a look at some and it just made it more clearer to me anyway thats what was used.
small enough to conseal but the blade is long enough and sharp enough to do what she was going to

Right, I always figured she brought along a good hunting knife with the gun. I don't recall testimony on type of knife that made those wounds. Hunting knife wounds contribute to proof of premeditation.

 

[Emmi]

Well, I think I was pretty clear in my post, but you stated men are "given a pass" for their behavior and you, along with the OP, are not comfortable with that. Among other arguments.

The only "evidence" we have that Travis treated Jodi badly is her own words and she is an admitted and confirmed liar that blames everyone else for her lot in life and her bad choices.

Jodi lied, manipulated, stalked, and probably stole. How is he, the man, in any way to blame for that? She used sex as a tool on Travis to get what she wanted. How does that qualify as a "man getting a pass for his behavior"?

That's what makes me angry. Jodi is not some docile, frail "little woman" who was taken advantage of by Travis.

JMHOO.

I've seen this "OP" and assume it's an acronym, but don't know what it stands for.

Yes, I did say that men are often given a free pass--i.e., "guys will be guys." Yes, I'm not comfortable with that. That was my argument in the post you're taking issue with. And, I was trying to show that by saying so--by simply noticing that bad behaviour is being rationalized away--one is not excusing murder. To yell at people for "excusing murder" when they've done no such thing just isn't right. It's illogical-- a straw man argument, or one that attacks an assumed premise rather than the actual premise.

So, when you write: "Jodi lied, manipulated, stalked, and probably stole. How is he, the man, in any way to blame for that?" I have to reply: why are you asking me? I never said he was to blame for Jodi's bad behaviour.

ETA: OK, I now know that OP = Original Poster

 

[The_Flashlight]

This heartbreaking, and, disturbing photo, to me, shows that Arias shot Travis Alexander last.

Important info: By looking at the photo I can deduce the gunshot was postmortem. In the pictures I have seen all antemortem GSWs to the head: 99.9999% have been perfect circles as was the wound I see in that photo. They look irregular to a point of distinction, some even elliptical from (the way it was explained to me) swelling from blood filling the are surrounding the wound. Once exsanguinated when the skin begins to retract the wound is irregular from the expansion/contraction of the skin. When there's no blood flowing in normal amounts to the forehead area the swelling doesn't occur. Psych is my realm of fascination and where I usually make my most significance on this forum.

I have been on hiatus since the Gabriel Johnson debacle but Artsy1, Smart Blonde, and of course JBean (shout to all!!!) I was once known by DaneBramage.

 

[Bravo]

....ohmagaw!! They opened the Websleuth Bingo Room, again!!!! My dabbers! where's my dabbers! anic:

​

(sorry, going to my too serious job, soon...needed to be silly)

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[gcharlie]

We all know that Surrebuttal has now been granted to refute Dr. DeMarte's testimony about BPD;

now HLN is reporting that Surrebuttal may be requested (and granted??) to refute the ME's testimony.

Another motion coming???

JSS has announced the court schedule with closing arguments to take place at the end of next week. I can't see her allowing another ME to come in at this late date.

In terms of Dr. Geffner, the forensic psychologist, who will be testifying to rebut Dr. DeMarte, I don't know what the DT expects to gain out of this.

He is known for attempting to discredit witnesses for their testing approach. JW kept trying to stress elevated scores on the MMPI-2 in the scales for anxiety, depression. She also noted the PTSD score was above normal, but DeMarte said it was below clinical significance. JW also tried to import meaning to scales that were very low; IIRC this included aggression, with the implication that JA could not have acted aggressively.

I'm not sure that this new expert will have had the time to do an evaluation of JA.

FWIW, I do think that JSS has set down very strict guidelines for the scope of the upcoming testimony, which IMO is why she set aside only one day for testimony.

I'm just trying to figure what benefit the DT thinks they can possibly get from this witness???

 

[pferrin]

I've put a padlock on my brain until the verdict is reached. But after that I will have some stories....we'll have to have another Saturday night story hour. lol

This is a very intelligent thing to do. Thanks for being there for TA's family.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I don't understand something here .. WHY during a surebuttal argument can the DT put someone on the stand who is clearly affiliated with ALV? That is not the expert the rebuttal witness was up against, Samuals was. Clearly we are returning to the Domestic Abuse argument with this witness, am I the only one who thinks this is a little sneaky and runs afoul of the structure of proceedings?

I think we will see a few objections and sidebars during this testimony where the DT has to completely change the course of questioning. I assume what they can / cannot ask will be tightly controlled and they will try and throw a few last minute arguments in.

 

[jojomonkey]

Ok, just saw the side-by-side pictures of the Psycho shower scene and Travis. Wow, that is no coincidence.

It seems to me she convinced him to reinact the scene for her, probably told him it would be "fun". If indeed it is his favorite movie, he's seen it plenty of times and probably knows it by heart.

I have no words for her other than supreme evil. WHO even thinks of *&^$ like this???? What kind of F-ed up mind do you have to have to think this kind of thing up?

 

[Sulamith]

I though there was a previous post saying juror 8 was not in court at all today?

A reporter from CBS 5 tweeted that juror 8 was not in court all day..just so you know you were not dreamin' that up LOL! I had to back and find where I heard it!


jose miguel ‏@reporterjmiguel 3h It's important to note juror #8 was NOT in court today, his seat has been EMPTY ALL MORNING

 

[katiedid2]

I am glad the defense is putting on another hack at this stage. What do you think the jury will think, now that Juan has rested his rebuttal? They will feel irritation, disbelief, anger, impatience, incredulity and exasperation. Think about it--they KNOW THE CASE PERSONALLY. They have suffered through Nurmi's slow-motion-agony and Willmott's snarky, shrill & sarcastic questions that show she has no basic understanding of what her witness is saying. They have been "pop tarts" while Nurmi & Willmott stage their endless motions and side bars and in chambers meetings. They have wasted countless hours on Jodi's digestive tract and ever-present migraines when she feels things aren't going her way (and they took note that Jodi was on the stand for 2983 days with NOT AN INKLING of a migraine).

Now, right before closing arguments, they are going to be forced to sit through another wackadoo who feels that his testimony is for sale, just like the two other hacks. Not only that, but this guy has already SOLD BOGUS TESTIMONY and the AZ Supreme Court (or CA) cited his useless testimony.

BRING IT, NURMI & WILLMOTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The jury will hate you and your client even more!! Yay!!

Lol they just don't learn do they!

 

[FrayedKnot]

I wasn't lamenting the discussion, I was lamenting it being brought up in the general threads again especially when there is a dedicated thread for "which came first..." If that discussion is held to the dedicated thread for it, those of us who are not interested in a re-re-re-rehash of the gun first vs knife first debate won't have to wade through it.

Respectfully, as I am still catching up on the other thread, but you were actually the first poster to bring up the subject this morning. I remember reading it and thinking "Ruh roh! That's gonna start it up, for sure!" And boy, did it!!! Yipes!

:truce:

 

[Liebchenmutti]

JSS has announced the court schedule with closing arguments to take place at the end of next week. I can't see her allowing another ME to come in at this late date.

In terms of Dr. Geffner, the forensic psychologist, who will be testifying to rebut Dr. DeMarte, I don't know what the DT expects to gain out of this.

He is known for attempting to discredit witnesses for their testing approach. JW kept trying to stress elevated scores on the MMPI-2 in the scales for anxiety, depression. She also noted the PTSD score was above normal, but DeMarte said it was below clinical significance. JW also tried to import meaning to scales that were very low; IIRC this included aggression, with the implication that JA could not have acted aggressively.

I'm not sure that this new expert will have had the time to do an evaluation of JA.

FWIW, I do think that JSS has set down very strict guidelines for the scope of the upcoming testimony, which IMO is why she set aside only one day for testimony.

I'm just trying to figure what benefit the DT thinks they can possibly get from this witness???

I am positive that Juan is going to have Dr. Demarte give him ammunition for making this guy look like the quack he is! I can't wait.

 

[Linda7NJ]

JSS has announced the court schedule with closing arguments to take place at the end of next week. I can't see her allowing another ME to come in at this late date.

In terms of Dr. Geffner, the forensic psychologist, who will be testifying to rebut Dr. DeMarte, I don't know what the DT expects to gain out of this.

He is known for attempting to discredit witnesses for their testing approach. JW kept trying to stress elevated scores on the MMPI-2 in the scales for anxiety, depression. She also noted the PTSD score was above normal, but DeMarte said it was below clinical significance. JW also tried to import meaning to scales that were very low; IIRC this included aggression, with the implication that JA could not have acted aggressively.

I'm not sure that this new expert will have had the time to do an evaluation of JA.

FWIW, I do think that JSS has set down very strict guidelines for the scope of the upcoming testimony, which IMO is why she set aside only one day for testimony.

I'm just trying to figure what benefit the DT thinks they can possibly get from this witness???

I'm wondering if Juan will be able to rebut and talk about the SUPER elevated psychopathy scales of the MMPI?

That would be SWEET


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chelly]

I am glad the defense is putting on another hack at this stage. What do you think the jury will think, now that Juan has rested his rebuttal? They will feel irritation, disbelief, anger, impatience, incredulity and exasperation. Think about it--they KNOW THE CASE PERSONALLY. They have suffered through Nurmi's slow-motion-agony and Willmott's snarky, shrill & sarcastic questions that show she has no basic understanding of what her witness is saying. They have been "pop tarts" while Nurmi & Willmott stage their endless motions and side bars and in chambers meetings. They have wasted countless hours on Jodi's digestive tract and ever-present migraines when she feels things aren't going her way (and they took note that Jodi was on the stand for 2983 days with NOT AN INKLING of a migraine).

Now, right before closing arguments, they are going to be forced to sit through another wackadoo who feels that his testimony is for sale, just like the two other hacks. Not only that, but this guy has already SOLD BOGUS TESTIMONY and the AZ Supreme Court (or CA) cited his useless testimony.

BRING IT, NURMI & WILLMOTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The jury will hate you and your client even more!! Yay!!

Agree. The jury will think the DT hopelessly desperate.

 

[tss]

After watching the dateline - along came jodi story I do feel that Travis was playing with fire and it should be a good lesson to all to treat people with respect. Not saying he deserved anything to happen to him, just saying that I think he could have handled his relationship with Jodi in "better" ways.... But what do I know..

I just have to add this, and I know from personal experience, and likely many others do too, unless they married young and didn't have a lot of exposure to dating with others.
There are women who want to be treated in ways that people would be stunned to know, unless they knew that's what she wanted.

I even choose to not hook-up with some young women/girls in my 20's because it just wasn't in me to talk "dirty" or be "rough" with them, even though that was the only way to have any sex, that's what turned them on .. yes, my female friends of these girls would tell me "M you have to do this and act this way, if you want to get in her pants", excuse the directness, even had some who I was with for the day who would ask themselves for certain ways to be treated that would be considered,,,,well I'll just say unusual...I passed..I could go deeper into this but I think my point came across

 

[MeeBee]

never realized that the daft punk song is also the song kanye uses for his song stronger. learned something new today.

I heard Kanye's version on the radio last night and thought of Travis.

 

[katiedid2]

I don't understand something here .. WHY during a surebuttal argument can the DT put someone on the stand who is clearly affiliated with ALV? That is not the expert the rebuttal witness was up against, Samuals was. Clearly we are returning to the Domestic Abuse argument with this witness, am I the only one who thinks this is a little sneaky and runs afoul of the structure of proceedings?

I think we will see a few objections and sidebars during this testimony where the DT has to completely change the course of questioning. I assume what they can / cannot ask will be tightly controlled and they will try and throw a few last minute arguments in.

No your not the only one! I don't understand their logic or lack of. Juan will shred his testimony to pieces. I've never seen such a pair as determined to force logic where there is none.
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[otto]

JSS has announced the court schedule with closing arguments to take place at the end of next week. I can't see her allowing another ME to come in at this late date.

In terms of Dr. Geffner, the forensic psychologist, who will be testifying to rebut Dr. DeMarte, I don't know what the DT expects to gain out of this.

He is known for attempting to discredit witnesses for their testing approach. JW kept trying to stress elevated scores on the MMPI-2 in the scales for anxiety, depression. She also noted the PTSD score was above normal, but DeMarte said it was below clinical significance. JW also tried to import meaning to scales that were very low; IIRC this included aggression, with the implication that JA could not have acted aggressively.

I'm not sure that this new expert will have had the time to do an evaluation of JA.

FWIW, I do think that JSS has set down very strict guidelines for the scope of the upcoming testimony, which IMO is why she set aside only one day for testimony.

I'm just trying to figure what benefit the DT thinks they can possibly get from this witness???

Thankfully, it has been stipulated that no one will go home on Wednesday until everyone is done with the witness. If not for that, the defense would drag it out for another two weeks.

I rather doubt that any new testing can be introduced ... so what's the new witness going to say, that PTSD can be confused with other disorders ... implying that the prosecution witness didn't have enough experience to know that? Since the PTSD started after the murder (per defense psychologist), I don't see that it makes any difference. Jodi is responsible for causing her PTSD - if she has it.