Verdict Watch 05/03/2013

[Chester_from_THM]

I just want to warn you all of something...

Go to the store and buy lots of tissue b/c the penalty phase is going to be extremely difficult to listen to

Syra - do you think they will continue denigrating TA during the penalty phase? Or will they finally give that up?

I suppose they will, since their only play then is poor poor Jodi.

 

[neesaki]

When Juan objected he said something to the effect that nothing had been addressed like that. I believe Nurmi was going after Juan for pointing out that ALV lied about ever defending a man in a DV case, and how she seemed to think women could do no wrong. And what the heck was ever mentioned about Nurmi's hair? I must have been absent that day!

I think Nurmi got some of that from reading on the internet, lol. So ridiculous to bring that stuff up in his closing, imo.

 

[ElleElle]

ITA~ That was the DT's last nugget out of the mine. Just backfired.

I mean, first ALV forgets her glasses, then leaves her cell phone on.

Then Dr. G spills his water and burps. :giggle:

They felt the wrath of Juan.

Regarding Geffner. Generally speaking, a neuropsychologist has a lot of knowledge about the working brain on a living human being. More so than a forensic pathologist as they deal with deceased human beings and determine cause of death. Two totally different specialities. Using Dr. Geffner to refute an ME was a stretch and was not effective IMO.

 

[neesaki]

We're all tired, tired of Jodi, tired of Nurmi, tired of the fog, tired of the pocket hose.

You know what else I'm tired of? I'm tired of panelists on HLN who face lifts and eye jobs make them look like an alien burglar wearing a pantyhose mask.

This really made me laugh, :floorlaugh:. I just can't imagine who it is you're talking about, lol. :giggle:

 

[Kamille]

I am still just shaking my head at the time and expense spent pounding on DV only to hear - at the almost literal eleventh hour - 'whoops! Our bad! It was really heat of the moment.' WTF? Seriously. Just wtf?

Just think of the money paid to ALV and RS alone. And all that wasted time for the jurors, the court personel etc. Not to mention all the closed door meetings for whatever happened with ALV. For what? In the end the DT didn't even ask the jury to consider what both of them were there to testify to and aquit her as it was in self defense. :banghead:

MOO

 

[KarmicLaw]

My only fear about the jury is the number of older jurors. Many of them may not understand the youth of today, especially the more open and explicit sexuality. I worry that they don't understand that Jodi didn't get a brazilian wax just because se would be in a bathing suit. Talk about premeditation! She wanted TA to seduce her... It's little moments like this that cause me to cringe in fear. Please, please, please let this jury deliver us from evil and convict her of Murder One.

 

[ElleElle]

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows- except Jodi. Otherwise it would have been documented somewhere.

That is interesting, isn't it?

And the elephant in the room....what was Travis so angry about that he referred to in the May 26 message? What did JA do? Why didn't they explain?

 

[Nezumi]

My only fear about the jury is the number of older jurors. Many of them may not understand the youth of today, especially the more open and explicit sexuality. I worry that they don't understand that Jodi didn't get a brazilian wax just because se would be in a bathing suit. Talk about premeditation! She wanted TA to seduce her... It's little moments like this that cause me to cringe in fear. Please, please, please let this jury deliver us from evil and convict her of Murder One.

I wouldn't worry too much about the older jurors. As someone pointed out not too long ago: today's seventy year old was 20 at Woodstock. ;-)

 

[katydid23]

I don't believe she said he woke her up to "anal" sex. And she DID consent to anal sex throughout their sexual relationship and with another. To each their own. I really don't care whether she "liked" it or not. She consented and in the sex tape she absolutely said she enjoyed it.

And I'd like to see a raising of hands for those who don't mind or did not mind when their husband or boyfriend woke them or wakes them up with sex. Rape? That's little out there! IMO.

Before anyone goes crazy on me...of course I do not condone rape or non-consenting sex.

Personally, I feel loved and appreciated if I wake up to my husband initiating sex. And I know he feels the same way. It is not rape, imo. If you are sleeping in bed next to your lover, there is kind of an implied consent.

If a man initiates sex with a random sleeping woman, who is not his girlfriend, and not sleeping next to him in his bed, then that is a sexual assault. JMO

 

[Kamille]

My only fear about the jury is the number of older jurors. Many of them may not understand the youth of today, especially the more open and explicit sexuality. I worry that they don't understand that Jodi didn't get a brazilian wax just because se would be in a bathing suit. Talk about premeditation! She wanted TA to seduce her... It's little moments like this that cause me to cringe in fear. Please, please, please let this jury deliver us from evil and convict her of Murder One.

Well I don't think there are any "older" jurors. There was one man who was classified as being "older" and he is now an alternate. I would imagine that any of the jurors in the "older" category now are actually the same age or younger than a good portion of the posters here on this board. And there's been a lot of interesting and informative posts regarding the topic that indicate that people in this age range not only understand the youth of today but are rather "youthful" themselves. LOL.

MOO

 

[rose222]

This is such a good post- I totally agree with you here. One of the reasons why a murder 1 verdict is so important is that anything less will open the door to future travesties like this.

Think about it- if JA is given less than murder 1, any like minded psychotic can have the opportunity to weigh murdering a boyfriend/husband/partner against getting a relative slap on the wrist.

She could say...."Well, he's an ahole who has done x, y, and z to me, he has it coming anyway. So even if I get caught, all I have to do is make some **** up, sell it to 12 dupes on a jury, and at worst I get popped with manslaughter. Hmm. Maybe 8 years with good behavior? Eh what the hell, that **** has it coming. I'll risk it. After all, JA got away with it."

The above scenario wakes me up in the middle of the night. The wrong verdict will leave the possibility for justification like this. Scares me. I pray the jury gets this one right.



<respectfully snipped>

I just had to comment on that, seeing how because of this murderer people are now understandably afraid of people with BPD. I was diagnosed when I was 18. It was devastating to hear. I went to my therapist, completely despondent, with a picture of Glenn Close from Fatal Attraction taken from a psychology book.

While in her office, I fell apart, pleading with her to believe me when I said I hadn't and would NEVER hurt anyone in my life. I couldn't understand why I'd be so maligned, compared to this wholly evil movie character, when all anger/abuse/etc. was ALWAYS turned on myself. I would have tossed myself down a flight of stairs before I ever hurt an innocent person. She told me that I wasn't just a diagnosis, but a human being. At that time, a troubled one, yes. But more suffering from an emotional "clotting" disorder if you will.

A non borderline suffers a setback, like a break up and mopes around the house for awhile, eats too much ice cream, listens to sad songs and eventually gets over it. A borderline falls into a deep depression, floods their brain with how much of a loser they are, how nothing in life will work out, etc. The reaction to a setback is disproportionate to the stimulus. But not all borderlines are, by definition, dangerous to anyone else.

JA is borderline PLUS psychopathy and narcissism. Her demons are directed outward, specifically pointed to destroy others.



Rose. :seeya:

I think in addition to addressing the forensics, it's a preemptive strike to get ready for the aggravation stage. A knife attack is excessively cruel and when you have a conscious victim who knows he's dying, that gives extra fuel to the jury to find in favor of death.

Thank you, Angelina Frost, for your informative post. It's painful when people assume that those suffering from 'bipolar, BPD, etc. must necessarily be violent toward others. I've met quite a few people suffering from bipolar etc. and they are some of the nicest people I've ever come across. Most of them were only self-destructive.

I can only say one thing about JA. She is just one of the most evil human beings to ever walk this earth. Evil through and through.

 

[Tuba]

The jury may rest a lot of their analysis of the testimony on the admonition: if you find X is false in one statement, you may find X false in all and disregard her testimony. Judge Stephens gave that admonition last week. This legal counsel has never been more important than in the instant case and the prosecutor took full advantage of its value. The jurors may also be motivated to dismiss the defendant's testimony because she insults them by lying to them. We also know that as to many allegations like the abuse, no evidence exists aside from her testimony.

Nurmi spent considerable effort on the notion that Arias had multiple opportunities to kill Travis prior to the shower scene and that it is unreasonable to think she would not do so, if she entered his home with the intent to murder him. In arguing thus, he is substituting reasonable conduct for the fury of a woman scorned. Killings do occur when the killer cooly acts to take someone out because he stands in the way of another ambition or goal. In this sense, the murder is secondary. When love turns to hate, however, the vengeance is barely contained and the murder is up close and personal. It is actually a statement and the killer wants the victim to get the full meaning of it, yes, full in his face. Something to remember as he gasps his last.

 

[kscornfed]

I just want to warn you all of something...

Go to the store and buy lots of tissue b/c the penalty phase is going to be extremely difficult to listen to

but when we get to that point, it means she's been convicted of first degree murder. whatever they decide, she'll never be free again. LWOP, DP whatever is ok with me. i look FORWARD to the penalty phase, when the jury will hear things they have NOT heard up to now, and will be even more convinced she's a monster who doesn't deserve any leniency whatsoever.

my heart breaks for his family, but this will be their chance to show the jury he was a real human being, loved by many people. after putting up with her dog and pony show over the past 5 years, i can only imagine what a relief that will be for them.

 

[Bluewater_Girl]

This is such a good post- I totally agree with you here. One of the reasons why a murder 1 verdict is so important is that anything less will open the door to future travesties like this.

Think about it- if JA is given less than murder 1, any like minded psychotic can have the opportunity to weigh murdering a boyfriend/husband/partner against getting a relative slap on the wrist.

She could say...."Well, he's an ahole who has done x, y, and z to me, he has it coming anyway. So even if I get caught, all I have to do is make some **** up, sell it to 12 dupes on a jury, and at worst I get popped with manslaughter. Hmm. Maybe 8 years with good behavior? Eh what the hell, that **** has it coming. I'll risk it. After all, JA got away with it."

The above scenario wakes me up in the middle of the night. The wrong verdict will leave the possibility for justification like this. Scares me. I pray the jury gets this one right.



<respectfully snipped>

I just had to comment on that, seeing how because of this murderer people are now understandably afraid of people with BPD. I was diagnosed when I was 18. It was devastating to hear. I went to my therapist, completely despondent, with a picture of Glenn Close from Fatal Attraction taken from a psychology book.

While in her office, I fell apart, pleading with her to believe me when I said I hadn't and would NEVER hurt anyone in my life. I couldn't understand why I'd be so maligned, compared to this wholly evil movie character, when all anger/abuse/etc. was ALWAYS turned on myself. I would have tossed myself down a flight of stairs before I ever hurt an innocent person. She told me that I wasn't just a diagnosis, but a human being. At that time, a troubled one, yes. But more suffering from an emotional "clotting" disorder if you will.

A non borderline suffers a setback, like a break up and mopes around the house for awhile, eats too much ice cream, listens to sad songs and eventually gets over it. A borderline falls into a deep depression, floods their brain with how much of a loser they are, how nothing in life will work out, etc. The reaction to a setback is disproportionate to the stimulus. But not all borderlines are, by definition, dangerous to anyone else.

JA is borderline PLUS psychopathy and narcissism. Her demons are directed outward, specifically pointed to destroy others.



Rose. :seeya:

I think in addition to addressing the forensics, it's a preemptive strike to get ready for the aggravation stage. A knife attack is excessively cruel and when you have a conscious victim who knows he's dying, that gives extra fuel to the jury to find in favor of death.

Such an excellent post AF! Regarding the BPD diagnosis, you are bang on. IIRC, Dr. Demarte was cut off in her testimony after she stated that her diagnosis was BPD. She then started to say (paraphrasing) "I also diagnosed her with Adjustive..". Then the objection from DT. I think that the "adjustive" diagnosis was in regards to JA incarceration presenting symptoms of anxiety and depression, not PTSD. I think she said there were three diagnosis in total. I wonder if we'll find out what Demarte's full report is after the trial? I hope so.

 

[kscornfed]

True, but this may have been JM's strategy. By just having the forensics team describe the type of blood splatter evidence without theories, it prevented the DT from confusing the jury with their own theories and also prevented JA from using their theories to formulate her testimony when she took the stand.

Some have criticized JM because he did not have TA's friends testify during rebuttal. I think his strategy was to keep the jury's focus on the crime itself and not let the trial become a defense of TA's. How can you defend the character of someone who is dead without hearsay evidence? That would be very difficult. And the defense would be able to ask each one of these witnesses "Is it possible x,y and z happened behind close doors?" Each one of his friends would have to reply "yes anything is possible".

that would be character evidence, and it's not even allowed in the guilt phase, i don't believe. so whoever's criticizing him for that can wait for the penalty phase, when that will come in.

 

[BrendaStar]

Just wondering why JA wasn't charged with the heinous nature of the murder. It seems like Travis was murdered very cruelty and experienced much suffering at the hands of JA. Could this have been part of the 1st degree murder instructions? Isn't extreme cruelty also used when making charges in murder?

 

[AZWatcher]

We're all tired, tired of Jodi, tired of Nurmi, tired of the fog, tired of the pocket hose.

You know what else I'm tired of? I'm tired of panelists on HLN who face lifts and eye jobs make them look like an alien burglar wearing a pantyhose mask.

Hahahahaha!!!

 

[raisincharlie]

I've always thought that whatever it was that set Travis off, he was able to document it, which was why Jodi was threatened enough to kill him. It couldn't have been just hearsay, he had to have proof. Otherwise she would have figured she could just lie her way out of it. He had something she couldn't lie her way out of

The PPL thing, her making up people she sold to, that would provide the tangible proof I think he had.

Thanks for an idea that fits my theory!

I tend to think there is something big, such as your description, that is missing with respect to testimony presented during trial. I heard no testimony about what was found on Jodi's computer or her so called messed up hard drive. Something, or several things are missing in this overall picture. JMO - it appears to me the judge has bent over backwards for the DT with regards to what is probative and what is prejudicial. One has to wonder how much actual evidence of misconduct, perhaps felonious conduct, there is related to Ms. Arias. (i.e. no tire slashing could be directly questioned by JM, no questioning the stolen ring, Travis's journals being taken and so on, the list is long). I also think somewhere there is some kind of evidence that ties Gus Searcy to Jodi with regards to the 10 May tape recording, I do believe the two of them were up to something with that. I also think there is something tied to MM other than the forged letters that was not on the up and up so to speak, but again no testimony.

Sad to me, but it appears that just about anything that would give a honest look at Jodi's manipulation or wrong doing other than killing Travis was pretty much left out of this trial. As such, her motive(s) for murdering Travis could not be presented. I realize motive is not a required aspect, however if one exists, I fail to see why a judge should ever allow the facts of that to be excluded. Seems to me evidence of motive is very probative even if it shows the defendent to be a fraud, a thief, or some other delinquent. Especially when the defendent's choice of defense is total character annihilation of the victim.

 

[Boodles]

My only fear about the jury is the number of older jurors. Many of them may not understand the youth of today, especially the more open and explicit sexuality. I worry that they don't understand that Jodi didn't get a brazilian wax just because se would be in a bathing suit. Talk about premeditation! She wanted TA to seduce her... It's little moments like this that cause me to cringe in fear. Please, please, please let this jury deliver us from evil and convict her of Murder One.

Ah, but remember with age comes wisdom. And all "older people" were once younger people and have been around the block a time (or two). Even though none of us can imagine our parents ever having "done it," of course we were wrong! Older folks know a thing or two about a thing or two...

(And it's not like this is taking place in a rural Bible Belt county in the southeast!)

 

[Zuri]

This is such a good post- I totally agree with you here. One of the reasons why a murder 1 verdict is so important is that anything less will open the door to future travesties like this.

Think about it- if JA is given less than murder 1, any like minded psychotic can have the opportunity to weigh murdering a boyfriend/husband/partner against getting a relative slap on the wrist.

She could say...."Well, he's an ahole who has done x, y, and z to me, he has it coming anyway. So even if I get caught, all I have to do is make some **** up, sell it to 12 dupes on a jury, and at worst I get popped with manslaughter. Hmm. Maybe 8 years with good behavior? Eh what the hell, that **** has it coming. I'll risk it. After all, JA got away with it."

The above scenario wakes me up in the middle of the night. The wrong verdict will leave the possibility for justification like this. Scares me. I pray the jury gets this one right.



<respectfully snipped>

I just had to comment on that, seeing how because of this murderer people are now understandably afraid of people with BPD. I was diagnosed when I was 18. It was devastating to hear. I went to my therapist, completely despondent, with a picture of Glenn Close from Fatal Attraction taken from a psychology book.

While in her office, I fell apart, pleading with her to believe me when I said I hadn't and would NEVER hurt anyone in my life. I couldn't understand why I'd be so maligned, compared to this wholly evil movie character, when all anger/abuse/etc. was ALWAYS turned on myself. I would have tossed myself down a flight of stairs before I ever hurt an innocent person. She told me that I wasn't just a diagnosis, but a human being. At that time, a troubled one, yes. But more suffering from an emotional "clotting" disorder if you will.

A non borderline suffers a setback, like a break up and mopes around the house for awhile, eats too much ice cream, listens to sad songs and eventually gets over it. A borderline falls into a deep depression, floods their brain with how much of a loser they are, how nothing in life will work out, etc. The reaction to a setback is disproportionate to the stimulus. But not all borderlines are, by definition, dangerous to anyone else.

JA is borderline PLUS psychopathy and narcissism. Her demons are directed outward, specifically pointed to destroy others.



Rose. :seeya:

I think in addition to addressing the forensics, it's a preemptive strike to get ready for the aggravation stage. A knife attack is excessively cruel and when you have a conscious victim who knows he's dying, that gives extra fuel to the jury to find in favor of death.

Hugs to you and I commend your bravery and insight. How strong you are to have sought help and seek a diagnosis. Thank you for explaining about BPD. You put a face on it so eloquently and I now have a better understanding of it.

Psych is not my forte in nursing as I have specialized more in critical care. I am essentially a "lay person" when it comes to psych illnesses. It is encouraging to know that there are good treatments out there to help. A lot of people never realize that just because you can't see something on the outside, there is nothing wrong on the inside.

Broad sweeping generalizations sometimes are painful if one shares the same labelled diagnosis as someone like JA. You are not like JA. Nobody is. Her full diagnosis is probably 12 pages long and we will never know the full extent of it.

IMO you deserve high praise for enlightening us. Thank you... :seeya: