Trial day 53: REBUTTAL; #162

[otto]

I actually like your theory of that she actually saw that the gun only contained either 1 bullet or maybe just a few to begin with, and so she chose to just keep that in her back pocket as backup while she stabbed him.

Two weapons was part of the staging ... to give police the impression that two people were involved.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Are you talking about the first rental car she took on the trip to murder TA? If so, the missing floor mats and red stain were talked about. Columbo said that he thought she had kids in the car and thought they were Kool-Aid stains. I don't remember hearing anything about the smoke. I also remember JW asking JA about the floor mats during her testimony and she lied and said the rental car didn't come with floor mats.

Yeah, agree with all that, but we're talking about the car rental statement, which said "Remarks: Smoke Smell." I was wondering why, if that was referring to the white car, why no mention of the mats and stains. There were no questions about what that note meant specifically.

 

[ElleElle]

:rocker: If the bullet rolled it would have more blood on it.

I used to be in the gunshot first camp too.

I think I have finally come around to thinking she stabbed him first too. But just to play devils advocate. Do you see that crack in the tile. Is it possible that if she shot first and the casing landed there that the blood from a later stabbing went down that crack in the tile and then ended up pooling around the casing which would make it look like the casing landed in the blood, when really the blood just went down the crack and surrounded it.

Nah....I think I have come around to agreeing she probably stabbed him first. :floorlaugh:

 

[aa9511]

I have to admit. Until very recently I was STRONGLY against the DP. I guess one of those liberal types who opposed it at all costs. The main reason for that is because a lot of mistakes are made and our criminal justice system is imperfect. If there is even one "mistake" it is too many. I did a 20 page paper in college in my Ethics and Law class about the DP and in doing research kept finding cases upon cases upon cases of people that were found to be exonerated after they were executed. At that time (it may be different now), the vast majority of DP convicts were minorities whose trials lasted a few days and had court appointed lawyers. The types of cases were where an eye witness points the finger at the black guy sitting in the court room saying he is the one that held up the 7-11 and shot the cashier and that was all the "evidence" that was necessary to execute someone. And then we find out years later that the "eye witness's" memory may not have been so good and it was actually someone else. Or we do DNA tests after the fact and figure out the guy we killed wasn't the one. That is too much for me. It's enough for me to say we shouldn't have the death penalty. No other country in the westernized world has the death penalty.

There is also an abundance of evidence that having the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. If it was a deterrent, we wouldn't have so many murders in this country. People that commit murder aren't thinking, "Oh. I shouldn't do this because I could be put to death." They typically think they are going to get away with it because the alternative of living the rest of their live in prison is pretty bad too.

I think I'm going on a tangent here. But in the past few years I've been leaning more towards the DP. When I see really truly sick human beings, like Jodi Arias, that have taken another person's life and they should not be allowed continue to live their lives and seek out happiness. Another example I can think of is that punk kid a few months ago who killed another teenager and wore a shirt saying "KILLER" to court for his sentencing and flipped off the parents of the teenage boys he murdered. That is disgusting.

OK. I'm really rambling. But I guess I'm having an awakening moment because I really feel that Jodi Arias should not be allowed to live in prison after what she has done and have the tax payers support her because I am so sure that she is a horrible murderess. I feel really dumb and stupid, but I started crying today watching the trial and knowing they were showing Travis's autopsy photos and his family had to look away. For the first time in this case I truly empathized with the family and cannot fathom what they are going through. I couldn't stop crying for a half an hour. I felt so dumb because this has nothing to do with me and I've been watching the trial as something interesting, but it hit me today for some reason and after my emotional reaction and stepping into the shoes of Travis's family I really want to see Jodi get the DP.

I guess I feel like if it is so certain and so sure, like it is in this case, the DP is not a bad thing. But at the same time so many mistakes are made and that is inexcusable. Maybe as technology progresses we can make it so that if we don't have hardcore DNA evidence, no one can get the DP. That would be a bit of a start. Maybe.

You bring up many good points and a unique perspective since you've done a of research on it. It is incredibly tragic that so many innocent people went/are going to death row. I have a completely different perspective b/c I don't keep up with a lot of trials, I've just got sucked into this one and Casey's. And of course with Casey they found her innocent. I don't do a lot of reserach or anything. I guess the bad thing about these two trials is that they are so thorough and exhausting that then when a layperson like me is watching them, you start to think ALL trials are like this. Like with the Casey jury, you see that in a prism so you think ALL juries are so careful. That all judges are so careful, etc.. But in reality they're not, or else so many innocent ppl like you mentioned in your research wouldn't have gotten sentenced. I have never really given the DP a lot of deep thought...like I said I just got caught up in the two trials...but thanks for the insight. I just can't believe a jury would convict a person to death on say, an eyewitness report like the case you mentioned. In Jodi's case, though, I mean there is just so much evidence that I don't have any problem with it.

 

[LinasK]

I have to admit. Until very recently I was STRONGLY against the DP. I guess one of those liberal types who opposed it at all costs. The main reason for that is because a lot of mistakes are made and our criminal justice system is imperfect. If there is even one "mistake" it is too many. I did a 20 page paper in college in my Ethics and Law class about the DP and in doing research kept finding cases upon cases upon cases of people that were found to be exonerated after they were executed. At that time (it may be different now), the vast majority of DP convicts were minorities whose trials lasted a few days and had court appointed lawyers. The types of cases were where an eye witness points the finger at the black guy sitting in the court room saying he is the one that held up the 7-11 and shot the cashier and that was all the "evidence" that was necessary to execute someone. And then we find out years later that the "eye witness's" memory may not have been so good and it was actually someone else. Or we do DNA tests after the fact and figure out the guy we killed wasn't the one. That is too much for me. It's enough for me to say we shouldn't have the death penalty. No other country in the westernized world has the death penalty.

There is also an abundance of evidence that having the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. If it was a deterrent, we wouldn't have so many murders in this country. People that commit murder aren't thinking, "Oh. I shouldn't do this because I could be put to death." They typically think they are going to get away with it because the alternative of living the rest of their live in prison is pretty bad too.

I think I'm going on a tangent here. But in the past few years I've been leaning more towards the DP. When I see really truly sick human beings, like Jodi Arias, that have taken another person's life and they should not be allowed continue to live their lives and seek out happiness. Another example I can think of is that punk kid a few months ago who killed another teenager and wore a shirt saying "KILLER" to court for his sentencing and flipped off the parents of the teenage boys he murdered. That is disgusting.

OK. I'm really rambling. But I guess I'm having an awakening moment because I really feel that Jodi Arias should not be allowed to live in prison after what she has done and have the tax payers support her because I am so sure that she is a horrible murderess. I feel really dumb and stupid, but I started crying today watching the trial and knowing they were showing Travis's autopsy photos and his family had to look away. For the first time in this case I truly empathized with the family and cannot fathom what they are going through. I couldn't stop crying for a half an hour. I felt so dumb because this has nothing to do with me and I've been watching the trial as something interesting, but it hit me today for some reason and after my emotional reaction and stepping into the shoes of Travis's family I really want to see Jodi get the DP.

I guess I feel like if it is so certain and so sure, like it is in this case, the DP is not a bad thing. But at the same time so many mistakes are made and that is inexcusable. Maybe as technology progresses we can make it so that if we don't have hardcore DNA evidence, no one can get the DP. That would be a bit of a start. Maybe.

Hey, don't feel bad!:seeya: I'm proud to declare myself a "Bleeding Heart Liberal". I used to be Anti-DP too, until I came to realize that LWP just isn't good enough for some scum that there is no redeeming quality for- like the founder of the Crips gang for example, and we are having to pay to feed and house these monsters.

 

[aa9511]

Me too. But, don't ya think Ryan B. would of noticed it?

Remember according to Jodi, Ryan Burns is "full of crap." Lol.

 

[Optics]

I am only going to say this one more time. Stealing the gun and shooting him is premeditated. Stabbing him first does not work with that the premeditation theory.

Which ever way she did it, no one will know other than one person.

Well if you follow trials as you said you do, then you will know that "premeditation" can begin as soon as minutes before a murder. Why would you not think that stabbing a person is not premeditation? She didn't use one of Travis' knives, she brought the weapon. (or rather both weapons)

 

[deedee21]

OK, if that's for the returned car, I wonder why no mention of the floor mats and red stain. If it was for that car, I wish they would have asked him about this. Was it cigarette smoke or fire smoke?

There's so much I want answers to that JM doesn't care about, and that upsets me.

He told JM all 4 mats are missing. He said there were stains in the front and back seats. He said he thought it was koolaid. I wonder what kind of cigs MM smokes.

 

[ElleElle]

BBM~

Sorry i'm just asking for clarification and not trying to be snarky.

She had time to ponder driving 1000's of miles planning his murder = premeditation, not to mention the other piles of planning to kill him.

The reason why the gunshot theory does not hold water is because Jodi lied about it on the stand.

Jodi said she shot him first. No she did not, and i'm 100% confident in Dr. Horn's experience and expertise. :twocents:

I am only going to say this one more time. Stealing the gun and shooting him is premeditated. Stabbing him first does not work with that the premeditation theory.

Which ever way she did it, no one will know other than one person.

And i hate her with a passion. Hopefully the jury will see what an evil, heartless , egotistical, person she is. Who has absolutely no remorse for the carnage she has caused.

 

[deedee21]

What do you think will be jodis reaction when the verdict comes in for first degree?

 

[PPKik]

I am only going to say this one more time. Stealing the gun and shooting him is premeditated. Stabbing him first does not work with that the premeditation theory.

Which ever way she did it, no one will know other than one person.

And i hate her with a passion. Hopefully the jury will see what an evil, heartless , egotistical, person she is. Who has absolutely no remorse for the carnage she has caused.

Using the gun to control him when she stabbed him would not remove premeditation. JA went there with the intent to kill Travis and that has been shown over and over. I am confused as to why you don't think stabbing someone is premeditated.

"Carnage" is a great choice of words. I only hope the jury can see all the carnage and doesn't get hung up on gun or knife first. JA planned this murder and killed Travis over and over. I hope that is only what the jury focuses on.

 

[deedee21]

Yeah, agree with all that, but we're talking about the car rental statement, which said "Remarks: Smoke Smell." I was wondering why, if that was referring to the white car, why no mention of the mats and stains. There were no questions about what that note meant specifically.

There was. I heard him talk about it.

 

[Juli]

Yeah, agree with all that, but we're talking about the car rental statement, which said "Remarks: Smoke Smell." I was wondering why, if that was referring to the white car, why no mention of the mats and stains. There were no questions about what that note meant specifically.

Okay, gotcha. So you were just wondering why the mats and stains weren't mentioned in the "remarks section" along with the smoke remark, and why JM didn't ask about the smoke?

The only thing I can think of is that JM was able to determine from prior interviews with Colombo that the smoke smell wasn't significant to the case. As far as the mats and "Kool-Aid" stains, maybe Columbo hadn't noticed those until he went to clean the car. Maybe he just did a quick walk around the outside and after printing the receipt, he noticed the other things.

Just giving some possibilities, but your guess is as good as mine. I can see why JM wouldn't bring up that they weren't listed in the "remarks" section. Why give the DT more ammo to cast doubt on the missing mats and red stains if you don't have to? :twocents:

 

[ElleElle]

I don't believe Juan doesn't care; he is Travis' voice from above. :angel:

He has proven the major pivots in this case and too much info can confuse the jury. (If they're not already).

OK, if that's for the returned car, I wonder why no mention of the floor mats and red stain. If it was for that car, I wish they would have asked him about this. Was it cigarette smoke or fire smoke?

There's so much I want answers to that JM doesn't care about, and that upsets me. :(

 

[uklady]

I almost think Gus could of been a catalyst for the angry May25 texts.. I just can't piece that part together. It seems that Gus knew alot about Jodi's and Travis' relationship. And, there were many others who had no clue, including Deanna Reid.

Ever since seeing Gus in court I have thought there is more than meets the eye there. Not sure what but it's just his manner when Juan cross examined him, his very defensive manner when questioned about ppl (that's a whole other can of worms) and his attitude towards Jodi. I'm not implying anything went on there but I believe she used her "charms" to manipulate him. He could of course just be a limelight seeker but something is not all as it seems and maybe, after the trial we may find out but who knows.

 

[m1279]

deleted, old news

 

[Optics]

I keep having the phrase 'crime of passion' go through my head that some folks 'out there' think. I don't see it as a 'crime of passion in any manner what so ever - what I do see it as is nothing short of a pure and evil "hate crime" - a cold blooded execution.

 

[PPKik]

What do you think will be jodis reaction when the verdict comes in for first degree?

Mug-shot smirk?? She still has many secrets. That's my guess. :ufo:

What do you think?

 

[Hatfield]

What do you think will be jodis reaction when the verdict comes in for first degree?

This is the million dollar question. A great office pool idea

I would advise both Wilmcott and Nurmi to keep their distance during this time.

My guess is she is going to give an evil look at the jury and she will just keep that evil mad look on her until they whisk her away.

She is the type of person I would worry about if I was on that jury. She is the type to keep a grudge and if she is ever let out, I would not be surprised if she creates a hit list. Luckily she should get either DP or LWOP.

 

[otto]

The bullet went in on his right forehead and it went to his left cheek. That's a through the brain shot in the head ... not grazing the forehead.

I have completely misunderstood this point until today. I had thought that Travis could have done something to deflect the shot, but this was done after he was dead ... or at the very least, completely incapacitated.

He bled to death ... dizziness, loss of consciousness, then death ... caused by the stab wound to the chest, the slit throat, and the shot to the head. All three were fatal.