weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #139

[IBsleuthin]

This is my, likely, unpopular opinion.

Given the criteria, it's very likely Travis could be classified as verbally abusive. Do we know what teed him off? No, but his word choice was exceedingly harsh. There's also evidence to suggest Travis WAS a bit of a player...

I don't think one has to believe Travis was perfect to want justice for his horrific murder.

The problem is when AV uses that as a spring board to corroborate the far less likely facts: that Travis was physically abusive and a pedophile. There's so little to suggest anything of the sort; it just doesn't carry weight.

Now, was Arias a wallflower? No. What comes across to me is that while Travis did seem like a bit of a player, he wore his emotions on his sleeve. A sociopath he was not. Arias was likely far more manipulative and conniving in evoking these emotions in him. There's nothing in Arias' personality, IMO, that suggests she was trapped in an abusive relationship. I think she knew Travis' buttons and pushed them, especially when she started to realize she wasn't his one and only.

I applaud you for your opinion. I too don't believe that because he was slaughtered he has become a saint. I'm getting that he had a nasty side to him as well.

 

[Mellinyce]

That's simply not true. In fact, Jodi's journal was not much help to her.

The majority of the evidence is Jodi and Travis talking back and forth, all day, every day, for months.

Plus interviews with friends, family, former boyfriends, former girlfriends, Travis journals, Travis blogs.

Like she kept saying, she did not need one word from Jodi Arias herself to arrive at her conclusions.

I think because you have never seen what she has seen you might think it doesn't exist. For some reason, the court is not allowing us to see it. But, it exists. That was made clear.

IMO

I beg to differ...BBM: IIRC She stated quite often that the she didn't need jodi's words (as in her conversation/clinical interviews!) to come to her conclusions but her journals were a big part of her assessment...they were the bulk of her thousands of pages to read.

 

[mck16]

I meant she knows her stuff about DV.

I def believe she is being bias not only in her responses, but her body language and eye contact around also.

IMO she can only come to the conclusion of her foundations based on what was given to her. She's not a sleuther and watching HLN as a hobby I bet.

The problem I had with her was her defensiveness right out of the box. She was rude and very smug. She did not follow direction even from the judge and she just kept on after being told many times to answer the questions properly. That in my opinion is not very smart. Her behaviour turned everyone against her and thus no one really listened when she did answer a question. jmo

 

[molly333]

Riiiiight. But do you honestly believe Travis texted for three hours straight?

I don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely, I do. I heard him talk about sex for a very long time and that was only a portion of the conversation.

Here's the unfair thing, and I can't say I have ever seen this happen before--she is commenting on thousands of words she has seen but nobody else will ever be allowed to see. This is so unfair to her because everyone is acting as if this information does not exist. It does exist, you just can't tell.

But, so far, I trust her completely. I'm willing to take her word for what she read and what it means.

IMO

 

[Schuby]

I wonder if ALV has had time to calmly think about the woman she was evaluating (is that the right word?), and realize that she was bamboozled by JA and that she may have made a mistake.

Now what does she do? Can you imagine? She 's been trying her best for the last several days to back-pedal a bit, but just enuff to not be too noticeable. JM was coming at her hard, so she stepped around answering him directly -- and, of course, she wasn't fooling anyone. I would think the questions from the jury would have unsettled her a bit, realizng that they weren't buying what she was selling... I think she knows much more about JA and TA now, and knows that things were not as JA had said they were. JMO. She seemed a bit more straightforward and less *advertiser censored*-sure when giving her answers. No capitulation, but just less sure....

Just my imagination, or not?

You could literally see the energy draining from her as the day went on.

 

[Keebler]

:furious::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Which show? Dr. Drew? I didn't watch any HLN today, just caught up on the testimony I missed today on Youtube.

What a great job by JM discrediting this witness today. I'm in awe when I watch him in action in the courtroom. And I don't care about the rumbling about his "rockstar" status, or the accusations of grandstanding. This is an attorney who cares deeply about what he is fighting for. If it was political with him I think he would have made that move already. He fights for justice for the victim, and he will not let up until he is satisfied that he has done everything he can to speak on their behalf.

My DH is starting to think I'm getting a bit of a crush. :blowkiss: Ya think?

Step off Princess....he's mine....:great::floorlaugh:

 

[wasnt_me]

I wonder if ALV has had time to calmly think about the woman she was evaluating (is that the right word?), and realize that she was bamboozled by JA and that she may have made a mistake.

Now what does she do? Can you imagine? She 's been trying her best for the last several days to back-pedal a bit, but just enuff to not be too noticeable. JM was coming at her hard, so she stepped around answering him directly -- and, of course, she wasn't fooling anyone. I would think the questions from the jury would have unsettled her a bit, realizing that they weren't buying what she was selling... I think she knows much more about JA and TA now, and knows that things were not as JA had said they were. JMO. She seemed a bit more straightforward and less *advertiser censored*-sure when giving her answers. No capitulation, but just less sure....

Just my imagination, or not?

She couldn't be snarky with the jurors, though she seemed to lose patience with their questions a time or two. I think because she couldn't treat them the way she treated JM, that was a bit frustrating for her. Additionally, she had to train herself not to look at the DT or Jodi for cues and help.

 

[molly333]

I beg to differ...BBM: IIRC She stated quite often that the she didn't need jodi's words (as in her conversation/clinical interviews!) to come to her conclusions but her journals were a big part of her assessment...they were the bulk of her thousands of pages to read.

No. Jodi's journals had nothing in them, remember?

Narry a mention of DV except for the occasional comment on his cruelty or harshness about some argument or her growing depression.

IMO

 

[MickyTwoShade]

We do know what ticked him off if you're referring to the texts I think you are. Beyond those it is hard to argue emotional abuse.

Right. The restaurant thing. Martinez did a good job with that baloney.

It's unfortunate that this trial seems to be as much about Travis' character as Arias' deed. If that's not a sign of her conniving and manipulation...

 

[Linda7NJ]

Oh the talk about the Brazilian wax like it was something perverted by the DV expert....

Waxed and good to go .... For a last minute unplanned trip to Travis's ....suuuuure.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wasnt_me]

The problem I had with her was her defensiveness right out of the box. She was rude and very smug. She did not follow direction even from the judge and she just kept on after being told many times to answer the questions properly. That in my opinion is not very smart. Her behaviour turned everyone against her and thus no one really listened when she did answer a question. jmo

My problem with her was her subjective view of everything. If nothing is a yes or no answer, if everything is in shades of grey, then she cannot definitively say yes or no to domestic violence.

 

[IBsleuthin]

Did you retain it?

I had to get up and remove myself from the computer.


(As a Websleuth addict can you IMAGINE the trauma this caused me?)

 

[verbonica]

The problem I had with her was her defensiveness right out of the box. She was rude and very smug. She did not follow direction even from the judge and she just kept on after being told many times to answer the questions properly. That in my opinion is not very smart. Her behaviour turned everyone against her and thus no one really listened when she did answer a question. jmo

I know that she was not allowed to see Dr. Samuels' testimony, but could the DT have told her anything about how he was pwned by JM?...

 

[Lorelilly]

After listening to it again, I heard the judge say, be back on Tuesday to "finish your testimony." Nothing nefarious about that, is there? I could have sworn when I heard it earlier today, it was like she was being ordered back.

Um, she was ordered back and she is under subpoena. There is an issue, what it is I'm not sure, but it requires her to be in court Tues. The "issue" is going to be discussed Mon with both sides and after that occurs the Judge will decide what to do next. If the "issue" isn't resolved satisfactorily between both sides ALV is going to have some explaining to do in court on Tues...just sayin'.

 

[Mellinyce]

This is my, likely, unpopular opinion.

Given the criteria, it's very likely Travis could be classified as verbally abusive. Do we know what teed him off? No, but his word choice was exceedingly harsh. There's also evidence to suggest Travis WAS a bit of a player...

I don't think one has to believe Travis was perfect to want justice for his horrific murder.

The problem is when AV uses that as a spring board to corroborate the far less likely facts: that Travis was physically abusive and a pedophile. There's so little to suggest anything of the sort; it just doesn't carry weight.

Now, was Arias a wallflower? No. What comes across to me is that while Travis did seem like a bit of a player, he wore his emotions on his sleeve. A sociopath he was not. Arias was likely far more manipulative and conniving in evoking these emotions in him. There's nothing in Arias' personality, IMO, that suggests she was trapped in an abusive relationship. I think she knew Travis' buttons and pushed them, especially when she started to realize she wasn't his one and only.

BBM: Then I am verbally abusive as well because if you come at me sideways...you WILL get a tongue lashing! We DON'T KNOW what started his "verbal abuse". She coulda told him off on a phone call for all we know! I cuss like a sailor after 3:00 pm...Does that make me verbally abusive?

 

[Linda7NJ]

:furious::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
Step off Princess....he's mine....:great::floorlaugh:

As long as we all understand Mark Eiglarsh is mine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MeeBee]

Absolutely, I do. I heard him talk about sex for a very long time and that was only a portion of the conversation.

Here's the unfair thing, and I can't say I have ever seen this happen before--she is commenting on thousands of words she has seen but nobody else will ever be allowed to see. This is so unfair to her because everyone is acting as if this information does not exist. It does exist, you just can't tell.

But, so far, I trust her completely. I'm willing to take her word for what she read and what it means.

IMO

Really? You don't want to see them for yourself and draw your own conclusions? She's already been shown to misrepresent other people's words (Jodi was a grown woman when she kicked her mother not a teenager. She said the relationship with Lisa was abusive and she says otherwise). I think you are far too trusting that her assessment isn't biased. She completely disregarded travis' expression of fear. You should remain cautious until you actually see the texts

 

[MickyTwoShade]

Absolutely, I do. I heard him talk about sex for a very long time and that was only a portion of the conversation.

Here's the unfair thing, and I can't say I have ever seen this happen before--she is commenting on thousands of words she has seen but nobody else will ever be allowed to see. This is so unfair to her because everyone is acting as if this information does not exist. It does exist, you just can't tell.

But, so far, I trust her completely. I'm willing to take her word for what she read and what it means.

IMO

I think it's one thing to ascertain and believe that Travis had a temper. I believe that.

But it's just not corroboration of physical abuse and pedophilia.

 

[AngelWings444]

I agree as well. The potentially sympathetic juror only asks one or two highly speculative questions as if trying to give themselves something to believe. Then nothing. I believe the more intelligent and attentive jurors will be able to set them straight because they have totally got it and seem confident in their assessment.

We have to remember the questions were read in the order they were received into the basket. I think those "potentially sympathetic juror" questions were from the beginning of ALV's testimony, since they were some of the first questions asked from the jury.

Although, not all jurors take notes, and some might not submit questions...I think it was a great couple of days for the prosecution! If this is the best the DT has, they are in big, big trouble. Great way to end the week! Even if there are a couple of jurors leaning towards JA, they are thinking about this over the weekend, and we still have rebuttal!

JMO.

 

[Schuby]

Oh the talk about the Brazilian wax like it was something perverted by the DV expert....

Waxed and good to go .... For a last minute unplanned trip to Travis's ....suuuuure.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lololololol. It really illustrates the point that if she is that old-fashioned, not just personally, but even in a professional role, she just isn't qualified deliver an opinion on a sexual relationship between two 20 somethings.