weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #139

[Lorelilly]

Bringing over from other thread 'cos the door slammed on me and broke my finger. :facepalm:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZlawyer
So...I was going to respond to a bunch of posts but there were just too many.

Just to clear a few things up:

1. A witness being impeached is not an EVENT that causes anything else to happen. It just means the cross-examination went well. It does not mean there is some announcement to ignore her testimony. It does not mean there could be a mistrial.

2. Witnesses lying on the stand is also common and normal and a daily occurrence. This does not cause a mistrial or create any need for a separate hearing. In the EXTREMELY unlikely event that perjury charges were brought--and I mean close to zero percent probability--those charges would be brought in a separate criminal proceeding and not as part of the proceeding in which the witness was testifying.

2. If JM had wanted to disqualify ALV as an expert, that motion would have been made and ruled upon before she got on the stand. And absolutely nothing she has said on the stand has altered the qualifications JM was aware of before she got there. And she clearly is qualified as a DV expert anyway.

3. There is some possibility that this hearing on Tuesday will concern ALV's approach of Samantha, depending on what she said and what she had been instructed prior to that time. Obviously, she knows at least as of today that it would be illegal for her to approach the family for an interview. It would also have been illegal for her to approach the family as an agent of the defense team (e.g., bearing a message from the defense), rather than going through the prosecutor. It would not have been illegal for her to say, e.g., "sorry, nothing personal" to Samantha, although it would have been unprofessional and thoughtless. But perhaps somehow she had already been instructed not to talk to the family? Seems unlikely, though. Anyway, my guess is that the hearing Tuesday is something about ALV that has ticked off the judge and that ALV was subpoenaed for (so she is not testifying in her expert capacity IMO). I suppose there is also some possibility it's a contempt hearing relating to her non-cooperativeness on the stand, since she was admonished numerous times and might have been further instructed in chambers. But normally non-cooperative witnesses are not held in contempt--they are just made to look like biased fools in front of the jury, and that's good enough for most of us.


Thank you, as always, AZlawyer.

I have been off line since the end of court today. Has anyone posted the possibility that the same juror that asked LaViolette why she continually looked over and smiled at the defendant may have sent a note to the judge last week that LaViolette was being coached from the defence table?

I wondered if the two hour session in chambers the other day, with LaViolette present, was while the judge went through the camera footage, and now Tuesday is a hearing on Wilmott's behaviour.

Just a thought.

This clears up a WHOLE lot! Thank You

 

[JRS_JD2L]

Does JVM realize that she is using a microphone?:truce:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Looked like "jerk." She couldn't be stupid enough to have actually done that, though. Right?

Even though the judge had the white noise down it would have still been recorded on ALV's mic right? If she did it she'll get another smack.

 

[seguek9]

Could Ms. Wong be called to the stand to verify that she was the person who received the tape with Travis shooting the gun? I'm not concerned whatsoever about her having an attorney, all networks have their own lawyers.

^^^THIS^^^
That's exactly what I think...the Dave Hall Video....

 

[Schuby]

Looked like "jerk." She couldn't be stupid enough to have actually done that, though. Right?

She knew it was her last day on the stand. Why not? You know she loathes him with an intensity greater than the heat of a thousand suns.

 

[Nhic]

Looked like "jerk." She couldn't be stupid enough to have actually done that, though. Right?

Well the video speaks for itself. It looks like she said "jerk". If this were brought to the court's attention, what, if any, repercussion would she face by the court?

 

[tlcya]

I would have thought that too but according to her CV, she has been an expert witness in over 20 trials.

family court trials in which she submits reports for the most part. And even if she does have to actually take the stand, those proceedings are much shorter and not the same tone, decorum etc that a criminal DP murder trial is.

Not saying she is not arrogant and rigid as well, just saying I am not convinced of either yet to the exclusion of the the other.

arrogance

ignorance

or some fatal combination of both?

either way, she's done. The jig is up. Nobody is buying what she is hawking.

 

[katydid23]

Part and parcel why I refuse to watch it. After the jury questions left NO doubt what side they are on, the TH will STILL throw the State under the bus. It's like a Benny Hill sketch.

I wonder who has been the bigger liability for the DT- Samuels or ALV?

Samuels seemed inept and incompetent. But he did admit that PTSD was ' not a get out of jail free card' at least. And he sent her a book, but he did seem to TRY and at least appear unbiased. He is looking better now that ALV has been on the stand for a week.

 

[Lorelilly]

So does that mean she is NOT getting paid for that day.....as she has been subpoenaed by the Court??

That would be nice!!

THAT'S A BIG FAT YES! Priceless!:fireworks:

 

[The Farm]

ALV looked over at the jury then said what appears to be the word "jerk".

If indeed that is what she said while looking at the jury, that is highly improper and there should be some sort of repercussion.

Wow is all I can say. Does she know the word RESPECT?

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Does JVM realize that she is using a microphone?:truce:

I know! It's like this chick is in crisis every. single. day. Why on God's green earth does she need to holler for the solid hour? I started skipping her show because she stresses me out, seriously.

And Lauren Lake on Dr. Drew? She is going to be the cause of me skipping that show. She screams so loudly while at the same time moving her head closer to her computer so on HD, I feel as if she's about to attack me. lol

 

[AZlawyer]

Even though the judge had the white noise down it would have still been recorded on AVL's mic right? If she did it she'll get another smack.

If she said it out loud, then yes. And it would have come through the court reporter's headphones. Those mikes are really, really good.

 

[dani]

Help please…the sweet, dulcet tones :floorlaugh: of Ms. Wilma's voice as she was doing re-direct to the jurors questions lulled me to sleep. Upon awakening court was over.

So now I need to ask, what happened? I don't mean any of ALV's testimony. I mean is Ms. Wilma done? Did Juan get to cross examine her (or does he even get to)? Did the jury throw tomatoes at ALV? Did Jodi steal the water pitcher?

P.S. Pray for me. I still have 5 more tax returns to do for "kids" and grandkids. (Which is the reason I fell asleep in the 1st place.) Sorry to be a pain. :blushing:

 

[katydid23]

These two female defense attorneys on JVM are ridiculous. One of them is ranting ' WHO leaked the story that ALV went to the hospital??? !!'

Ummm...actually, it was ALV's good friend who told a reporter that.

 

[hindsight2020]

Two jurors gone and all these mistrial motions are making me nervous, I hope this trial moves a tad bit faster now that LaV is their last witness, although, I didn't hear them rest. DT may have a computer witness but I don't see it taking that long on the stand.

 

[Schuby]

Samuels seemed inept and incompetent. But he did admit that PTSD was ' not a get out of jail free card' at least. And he sent her a book, but he did seem to TRY and at least appear unbiased. He is looking better now that ALV has been on the stand for a week.

True. It says a lot about how extreme ALV's testimony has been that Samuels is now the benchmark of unbiased testimony in this case.

Also he didn't seem as combative on the stand and he didn't seem to have a personal beef with Juan.

 

[IBsleuthin]

I just saved myself thousands and thousands of dollars by not hiring an 'expert' witness and simply going to Wikipedia.

The right of self-defense (according to U.S. law) (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in a level of violence, called reasonable force or defensive force, for the sake of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including, in certain circumstances, the use of deadly force

My understanding is that in testimony today, ALV said that Travis was NOT a victim of domestic violence.

Doesn't look like he was a victim of self-defense either.

What's missing here then?

 

[The Farm]

She knew it was her last day on the stand. Why not? You know she loathes him with an intensity greater than the heat of a thousand suns.

LOL the heat of a thousand suns! I love this place! Thanks Schuby!:great:

 

[AngelWings444]

No, she was going to be called after Jean C. regarding the defense's motion for prosecutorial misconduct, regarding the fans of Juan, photos and cane signing.

Thanks! Weren't the jurors already questioned and none of them witnessed it?

DT is grasping...it's only going to get worse. A mistrial is their only hope left. I really hope we get to deliberations soon. lease:

 

[Nosey Parker]

Did JW seem upset, though?

Hard to tell as she watched her case go down the tubes today.

Judge Stephens did call a ten minute recess, quite obviously because JW lost focus on her line of questioning. She was either angry or tense while on redirect this afternoon.