Trial day 53: REBUTTAL; #162

[Ammonitida]

Does this help at all? Travis was shot with a jacketed hollow point . The blue is what a regular bullet does. The green is what a hollow point does. It creates hydrostatic shock in the area once it enters the subject.


View attachment 32672

http://stresshooting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28&Itemid=98

Eta: link

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

The hollow point that hit Travis did not expand because it immediately struck bone. In most cases, when these types of bullets hit bone first they behave like regular full-metal-jackets.

Also, hallow points have significantly greater velocity.

 

[joypath]

:banghead::banghead::banghead:



Fellow WSers......I got called away (okay, reminded for the umpteenth time that I was expected at a meeting :facepalm during the jury questions of Dr. Horn.....SO was he questioned by JM and JW?, and is the next step the BPD surrebuttal on Wednesday? TIA




:twocents::twocents: BTW: members our team who recently experienced some damnable gsw cases and one of our dudes who has YEARS of experience with the "gun & knife" club damage, ALL agree that the lack of cranial blood staining is significant (so Jodi's version belongs in FANTASYLAND) and......you can make "sections" of a 5 day under A/C decom brain but NOT get too much information from them (and a HE!! of a lot of artifacts!) :blushing::blushing:

 

[Angelina Frost]

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..

The qualifier "Not saying he deserved anything...." concerns me.

He attempted to handle it in better ways. She refused to let him go, and eventually, refused to let him live.

If he was treating JA poorly, she was an adult and had 100% power to walk away, not accept his calls, stop having sex with him and forget she ever knew him. She didn't. She drove 1000 miles to assassinate him. For that part alone, he is 100% innocent.

 

[Mare10]

so this robert geffner,has books on amazon and hes wanting $167 for one ?! seriously??

i look forward to juan tearing him down down down to join his esteemed colleague alyce

I just cannot wrap my mind around hearing testimony about an evaluation done on JA after the trial is in full swing. After she has heard everything and knows what the weak points are. After her hearing Dr. D's testimony. After JA reading books, magazines etc. After listening to Samuels and his junk. After listening to ALV and her junk. After JA talking on the phone to Donavan and others.

How can any of his evaluation be relevant? She lied before and know Ms. IQ has a ton of knowledge and will lie again in the eval. I'm sorry but I just don't get it. Not being snarky but if anyone could explain that more I'd so appreciate it.

 

[MistyM]

let's talk about frontal lobes y'all

Disturbance of motor function is typically characterized by loss of fine movements and strength of the arms, hands and fingers (Kuypers, 1981). Complex chains of motor movement also seem to be controlled by the frontal lobes (Leonard et al., 1988). Patients with frontal lobe damage exhibit little spontaneous facial expression, which points to the role of the frontal lobes in facial expression (Kolb & Milner, 1981). Broca's Aphasia, or difficulty in speaking, has been associated with frontal damage by Brown (1972).

http://www.neuroskills.com/brain-injury/frontal-lobes.php

 

[rose222]

Okay. I went back and watched the M.E's testimony again. The first jury question was very good. No blood in the middle of the bathroom means JA'S story is a big fat lie. The others questions are not too bad.

The jurors are limited in what they can ask the M.E. They cannot question his background/bias etc. like they did for Samuels/Alyce etc. They can only ask a few clarifying questions which they did.

 

[Alexander family fan]

I don't see TA guilty of anything. I think he was manipulated by JA with sex. Who knows, maybe she threatened to expose the sex tape or claim he was a pedophile if he didn't see her. I think TA was a victim of stalking and as a man didn't know it or didn't know how to fix the problem. I think the dynamics are different when men are stalked by women, and by this I mean that if they try get help or admit it they may be viewed as weak. But I resent that you think his story is a lesson to treat people with respect. No where did I see him treat JA disrespectfully.

I'm not sure but I took it that she wanted to teach her sons if you are not in love with someone, leave them alone, regarding sex. There is no such thing as friends with benefits, or booty calls, where one of the two people does not see things differently than the other. Just do not trivialize that for yourself, or any young lady you date. That is how I took what she meant? I think everyone on here loves and adores Travis and his family.

 

[LindaFaye]

As of Wednesday will we have to worry about a junor leaving are getting kicked off ?

 

[Nali87]

This is a great point

Danielle ‏@SheWhoDoes 2m

#jodiarias Who cries cuz of hurting some 1 in self defense? If some 1 was really going to kill u, would u feel bad about killing them 1st?

I'd like to think I would. I would have taken a life...

 

[sammijo]

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 understand what you are saying, but I think Travis could have been an ideally perfect boyfriend and if he decided the relationship was over, she would have went crazy and killed him just the same. He belonged to her and she decided his fate. Travis bears no responsibility for his death, at all.

An example of a really bad boyfriend I had, the first man I ever lived with and had a long-term relationship with - seven years.

My family was going to New Braunfels for the weekend and my ex said he couldn't go because he had to work.

Meanwhile, my Dad, who didn't go because he did not like river floating, was working at one of the local convenience stores in his retirement. Two ladies walk in while he's working and begin asking for directions to MY apartment. Turns out my ex was having a party in my apartment with all kinds of women and his buddies while I was away. And most of our mutual friends and all our neighbors new.

I was completely humiliated. And that was the mildest of the things he did and the lies he was caught red-handed in, and the things he did to me I won't even talk about here.

I never hurt him. I never killed him. I left him and found a good man who respects me and loves me, and I married that man.

Jodi could have walked away.

 

[TXProfessional]

For me, it is all about the jury questions. I'm always looking for what they might me thinking, how their thinking may have changed as testimony unfolds (this is why I like JSS asking in order the ?'s were asked), whether there are strong pro-state jurors, strong pro-defense jurors, what they are focused on, what their mindset is, and so on.

I have aligned myself with the family so much that I can't stand the thought of JA getting anything less than the death penalty so I feel very intense feelings of worry with regard to what the outcome will be.

There has been so much testimony over such a drawn out period of time that I am going to rewatch all testimony on juror questions only and, for my own peace of mind, try to understand what may or may not be coming in terms of juror deliberations. At this point, I am convinced that there are at least 3 very, very strong pro-state jurors, and one juror who is, at least somewhat, pro-defense or considering/entertaining the notion of self-defense.

So with that said is there anyone here has really taken a good look/analyzed the jury's questions and can reassure me about the upcoming surrebuttal.

 

[rose222]

The qualifier "Not saying he deserved anything...." concerns me.

He attempted to handle it in better ways. She refused to let him go, and eventually, refused to let him live.

If he was treating JA poorly, she was an adult and had 100% power to walk away, not accept his calls, stop having sex with him and forget she ever knew him. She didn't. She drove 1000 miles to assassinate him. For that part alone, he is 100% innocent.

You're much braver than I am. I don't even have the energy to respond to opinions like that. Travis was a victim. JA never was. Period.

 

[Nali87]

If there were a medical examiner who went along with the defensive team's shot-first theory, then it seems we would have heard testimony from him/her. Hmmm...

Good point!
Do you guys think JUAN should've brought in another ME?

 

[Truth Detector]

I might have a bit of fognesia, but who is "the old guy?"

I think the member was referring to Doc Samuels.

The older $300/hour 'expert' witness who has feelings for the defendant.

 

[Truth Detector]

Good point!
Do you guys think JUAN should've brought in another ME?

No; you always run the risk of major or minor defensible disagreements between your experts.

And then, instead of crystallizing the case for the jury, you wind up confusing them.

 

[ElleElle]

Correct. And since Dr. Horn is a Medical Examiner, common sense says he's experienced in his field and this is routine for him.

I have no idea why JW asked him how many autopsies he's performed. All that did what reinforce the fact that he experienced, and I would not question his findings. :banghead:

Okay. I went back and watched the M.E's testimony again. The first jury question was very good. No blood in the middle of the bathroom means JA'S story is a big fat lie. The others questions are not too bad.

The jurors are limited in what they can ask the M.E. They cannot question his background/bias etc. like they did for Samuels/Alyce etc. They can only ask a few clarifying questions which they did.

 

[Truth Detector]

Good point!
Do you guys think JUAN should've brought in another ME?

No; you always run the risk of major or minor defensible disagreements between your experts.

And then, instead of crystallizing the case for the jury, you wind up confusing them and introducing doubts -- even unreasonable doubts -- that hinder the jury.

 

[tomato]

Okay. I went back and watched the M.E's testimony again. The first jury question was very good. No blood in the middle of the bathroom means JA'S story is a big fat lie. The others questions are not too bad.

The jurors are limited in what they can ask the M.E. They cannot question his background/bias etc. like they did for Samuels/Alyce etc. They can only ask a few clarifying questions which they did.

I can't watch the trial live today so how's everything? going well?

 

[Kentucky Gal]

I dont understand how you can say that. The ONLY thing we have showing how Travis was AT ONE TIME are texts messages when he told her she was the worst thing to happen to him. And OBVIOUSLY she had already done something TO HIM, so he was pissed about it.

Everything else she is saying, IS LIES!!!!!!! NO ONE can agree (except her paid hired guns) that he was mistreating her IN ANY WAY!

I think SHE should have handled their relationship differently!!!!! Its a 2 way street when it comes to relationships..... I think he did the best he could with Crazy, but.... what do I know?

I just cannot wrap my mind around hearing testimony about an evaluation done on JA after the trial is in full swing. After she has heard everything and knows what the weak points are. After her hearing Dr. D's testimony. After JA reading books, magazines etc. After listening to Samuels and his junk. After listening to ALV and her junk. After JA talking on the phone to Donavan and others.

How can any of his evaluation be relevant? She lied before and know Ms. IQ has a ton of knowledge and will lie again in the eval. I'm sorry but I just don't get it. Not being snarky but if anyone could explain that more I'd so appreciate it.

IMHO This is a Hail Mary pass to appease JA. She gets one more chance to try and be human and get the strokes that she needs, no more, no less. The jury has made its mind up basically and if this guy is an associate of ALV he's bringing more of the same. Remember the way the jury mocked her during jury questions. I think it is just an excuse to spend taxpayers money and give JA her last chance in her beloved spotlight.:twocents::twocents::twocents:

 

[Ammonitida]

Okay. I went back and watched the M.E's testimony again. The first jury question was very good. No blood in the middle of the bathroom means JA'S story is a big fat lie. The others questions are not too bad.

The jurors are limited in what they can ask the M.E. They cannot question his background/bias etc. like they did for Samuels/Alyce etc. They can only ask a few clarifying questions which they did.

The first question bothered me because I can't remember if there was blood in the middle of the bathroom. So there wasn't?

The other questions did not bother me.

Even if a juror believes the way I do (gunshot first), the testimony is still good because it highlighted the severe injury to his brain. Someone in this condition would only be trying to defend himself, not murder someone in a homicidal rage. Ditto if he was coughing up blood while standing over a sink, Wilmott!