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
Where would she had gotten the physical abuse, if not from JA? Also, do you think she would have thought TA a pedophile without JA's input? Off color jokes, alone, doesn't a pedophile make.
Also, don't you find it weird that there are only about 4 instances that she can point to in the text/email/instant messages, and that phone call to call "abusive?"
The "rant," where he was upset that she left something behind - he thought she was doing stuff intentionally.
The "rant" about her lying about someone coming to the restaurant and telling her that he was cheating - I think she was spying on him and that's how she knew about Lisa and used the restaurant story as a cover to confront TA with it.
The "rant" where he calls her a sociopath - he was clearly responding to something she had done.
Him telling her to empty the voicemail - I added that one as a joke.
If there are some other ones, please refresh my memory. The point is, it seems she would have a lot more examples. She looks at the length of the rants, but not really the frequency.
She also used emails from other people, but those emails aren't really in context, which is why it would have been beneficial, for instance, for her to talk to Chris and Sky H. It could be that they confirmed what she thought, but it also could be that they would not have. Either way, it would have been ideal to have context.
Finally, she is using Travis's past to say that he probably grew up to be physically and psychologically abusive, and she is using JA's childhood to say she likely grew up to be a victim - or "survivor." That in and of itself is a gender bias because she doesn't think it's possible for it to have been the other way around and anything to suggest that JA had violent tendencies and a propensity for manipulation, she disregards. IMO, ALV worked backwards and looked for things to fit a domestic abuse scenario. She picked out everything that TA had ever done wrong and said, "I can make a case out of this." She ignored anything that contradicted it. I think that's called tunnel vision...
So, yea, I do think her evaluation is different without JA. I, personally, don't know how you can say that physical violence PLUS psychological abuse isn't worst than psychological abuse, alone. Of course psychological abuse is incredibly detrimental, but I can't imagine women who suffer from psychological abuse alone would say that the added element of having the tar beaten out of them would not have made an insufferable situation even worse.
jmo
