weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #140

[katiedid2]

didn't she say she gave JA some books? well, what i think is when they decided on the domestic violence angle, ALV sent her books to study and spent a lot of that 44 hours schooling her in DV lingo and catch words. i wish we knew what books she sent her.

Bingo

 

[katiedid2]

I <3 Mikee 'kung Pau' Daniels ....
every video is a classic!

He's hilarious I love his humor, I'm going see if he has any newer ones?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I have lost all sympathy for ALV .. any that was left has been eroded by watching and re-watching her answer juror questions that contradict her answers from mere seconds before, and ignore rational thinking for the sake of attempting to prop up a failing defence case that never had a chance to work in the first place because it was based on a ton of bald faced lies by the accused.

This may have been posted already, but it's the best article I've seen yet: http://eggtreenews.wordpress.com/2013/04/12/alyces-mad-hatter-kool-aid-party/

And you know what, there really was a case here for the defence team if they had managed to get jodi in front of a truly insightful psychologist / expert witness .. someone who could have discussed the REAL issues of this case. How a girl with a shaky past, who ceased being parented at a very young age developed a personality disorder which was never addressed and lurched from one failed relationship to the next then met a man she thought she loved who just wanted to have sex with her and discard her if someone he thought 'worthy' came along, only to pick up with her and discard her again for the next 'worthy' candidate. How that would effect someone with a severe personality disorder and perhaps why things ended up the way they did. I mean at least we'd be hearing an argument based on the truth of things, as opposed to the insulting and ridiculous defence put on.

No wonder the juror questions are harsh, they may as well have asked ALV if she thinks they are idiots, as that was pretty much the underlying message in all of them. No wonder Nurmi's gunning for a mistrial, the whole things a disaster, and you have to wonder at a defence team that didn't see this coming a mile off.

Note for next time Nurmi: Once you get your strategy together shell out for a focus group so you can get a little feedback on how things are going to go down, since clearly you have a hard time reading the writing on the wall yourself. Because you may not be able to get yourself out of this now, and it's not your head on the chopping block, it's your clients, and every future client is going to know about it.

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

My double-u key doesn't vork (!), so if I sound like I'm doing a bad Garbo imitation please forgive:

Does anyone kno vhy JA fired her first DT?

Previous posting re: what I could find out about Jodi's attorney history. I didn't see any other attorneys of record but I didn't look at every single document so I could have missed it.

>snip<

In June of 2010, she was being represented by Kirk Nurmi and Victoria Washington. The defense team submitted approximately 10 letters to the prosecutor's office purportedly written by Travis. By mid June Juanderful had filed a motion to preclude the letters.

Lots and lots and lots of legal wrangling over the admissibility of those letters. Her trial was to begin in early August 2011.

Either the night before or two nights before the start of the trial, Jodi informed Judge Stephens she would like to represent herself. Judge Stephens granted the request but asked Ms. Washington and Mr. Nurmi to remain on as advisory counsel.

MidAugust 2011, Kirk had filed a motion in limine to preclude the introduction of heresay evidence (text messages, e-mails)

Their motion to include the letters (which introduced her 3rd story was included) was denied mid August 2011. Shortly after that ruling, Jodi advised Judge Stephens that she was in over her head and Judge Stephens reinstated her counsel.

In December 2011, Ms. Washington filed a motion to withdraw as counsel to Jodi on the grounds that her office had previously represented someone in the case. It wouldn't affect Nurmi, her co-counsel, because he'd already left her office and had no knowledge of the other issue. Her motion was granted.

In January 2012, Jennifer Wilmot was assigned to the case.

All of this is available in the court records at Maricopa Superior Court. Just type in the case number or Jodi's name and you can view all of the court documents.

The issue of the letters and the e-mails/texts/IMs are available here ... just scroll to the bottom of the page. They're in .pdf form.

 

[SunnyinMO]

I think Ms. Wong from HLN is testifying for the Prosecutorial misconduct issue/motion.

And, I think ALV wants to finish up Monday because she has other engagements to attend to. But won't be able on Tuesday. moo

I got the impression that ALV had a doctor appt Monday and didn't want to come on Tues because what if she had to go for tests...JSS didn't want to hear about her personal problems...just plan to there as she was under subpoena. Personally I hope she doesn't show up and they go get her and drag her to court in handcuffs!:blushing:

 

[SCSam]

I keep asking this as a serious, not snarky question.... does the state of AZ have an requirements for a witness to be seated as an "expert"?

 

[katiedid2]

When asked about follow up after the last juror question was read, willmott said no your honor..Jm stood up and asked about the closet again and the day ended..I don't think ALV will testify more. I guess we just have to wait until monday/tuesday and let that. The defense has yet to rest so they might call another witness.

I hope the defence has no more witnesses as I'd like to see rebuttal soon.

 

[rose222]

Is there any proof that Travis knew she was coming to Mesa? I haven't been able to find anything.

Nope. She called him on her way but she claims he persuaded her to come all the way to Mesa. Yeah right.

All her pre-murder work (car, hair colour, gas cans, cell phone off in Arizona etc.) would have been for nothing had she told Travis about visiting him in advance. There is one theory: She tells him she wants to stop by to apologize in person, give him the sex tape (I believe her blackmail is what got Travis SO mad in May), return his money, and say goodbye because she really wants to move on. In this case she could have said 'Btw, don't tell anyone I'm visiting because I don't want anyone to think we're getting back together". This could have happened but she runs the risk of Travis telling his friends anyway. Why increase the chances of him telling his friends? A surprise visit makes more sense in everyway. It reduced her chances of him telling anyone.

I think her fake apologies and sex lured Travis that day into having sex with her one last time. He knew he didn't want physical stuff with her anymore. He wanted to find a good woman to marry. He was going to Cancun. I really think he thought he would have sex with JA one last time and she'd be out of his life after that.

 

[ChinaBlue]

I can't wait for Dr. Janeen DeMarte. :rocker:

Her website looks pretty sweet too.

http://sentiencepsych.com/

I have been looking forward to her testimony for a long, long time. Her credentials sound so much better than the other two "experts" - I think we will all be in for a real eye opener.

BTW Did they ever find who stole her laptop which had all her JA evaluation on it? Here's hoping she had it backed up on a flash drive.

 

[Colt46]

She did! In her article she lists 3 categories of battered woman syndrome. She then goes on to say that men have the ability to control or stop an aggressive act against them by a woman (rubbish). She then concludes that men don't fit the 3 categories of battered woman's syndrome because they can stop the aggression, they don't show fear, etc. She says fear is a requisite.

Bah.

Unbiased my ***. :furious:

Judging from one of the last photos of Travis sitting on the shower floor before he was slaughtered, I beg to differ with ALV's brilliant conclusion.


I suppose John Bobbitt would also have a problem here.

 

[ElleElle]

Disagree. Jodi and Travis were like two trapped souls knowing they weren't right for each other, but kept getting drawn back to each other. 2 negatives= a positive?

Jodi couldn't permanently have Travis, her mission: Seek and destroy.

Almost like modern day Anna Karenina by Tolstoy.

snipped by me

Oh please - I in no way believe that JA was ever uncomfortable with any sexual act with TA. And who believes that the first BJ was suggested by TA instead of JA (per her words)? I'm thoroughly convinced she initiated sex with him ASAP to get him intrigued, hooked and married as fast as possible. This kind of thing has been going on since the beginning of time.

 

[Dmacky]

Beside the killing of TA -- I would get so PO'd every time JA would say "When Travis passed away......."


Gr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r- :furious:


Plus when they turned around TA words when (JA) was egging him on the tape - and he said "She sounded like a 12 year Girl...."

Since I come from a FARM, Thank God TA never said something like "She sounded like a Cat in Heat". The DT would have started to include *Barn Animals* and put Barn Animals on the witness stand.


They took words and Twisted them so much, Geeeeeeeeeeeez

LOL about the barn animals.
The ONLY reason TA ever said anything about her sounding like a 12 yr. old girl was because JA was talking in a "baby voice" while she was initiating this TAPED sex talk! It just drives me crazy mad that ALV keeps bringing it up while talking about pedophlia :furious: She calls it corking?? or porking? a 12 year old girl.

 

[pferrin]

lol. That was the idea. I am sure there are a *few bums* that needed a break from the trial all these weeks, and needed to have a *bottom* stretch. LOL

You could have also stood on your head after digging through the Trash bin, or throw your hair around. < gag > like JA



But now you Feel GREAT, eh? Top half, and bottom half :great:

I Swanee when Juan is doing cross or recross or direct. ...I run like a crazy woman to go to the potty so I don't miss a moment Too funny

 

[LambChop]

I keep asking this as a serious, not snarky question.... does the state of AZ have an requirements for a witness to be seated as an "expert"?

Only if they are there testifying as an expert, I believe. In most courts you have to qualify as an expert.

 

[Tipstaff]

Even if this were true :floorlaugh: I do not understand why people think lying on the stand is of no consequence! :furious:

Look at the Anthony's, Cindy in particular. No legal consequences and the world was watching. And then waiting!

 

[DeAnnaMisrahi]

I have lost all sympathy for ALV .. any that was left has been eroded by watching and re-watching her answer juror questions that contradict her answers from mere seconds before, and ignore rational thinking for the sake of attempting to prop up a failing defence case that never had a chance to work in the first place because it was based on a ton of bald faced lies by the accused.

This may have been posted already, but it's the best article I've seen yet: http://eggtreenews.wordpress.com/2013/04/12/alyces-mad-hatter-kool-aid-party/

And you know what, there really was a case here for the defence team if they had managed to get jodi in front of a truly insightful psychologist / expert witness .. someone who could have discussed the REAL issues of this case. How a girl with a shaky past, who ceased being parented at a very young age developed a personality disorder which was never addressed and lurched from one failed relationship to the next then met a man she thought she loved who just wanted to have sex with her and discard her if someone he thought 'worthy' came along, only to pick up with her and discard her again for the next 'worthy' candidate. How that would effect someone with a severe personality disorder and perhaps why things ended up the way they did. I mean at least we'd be hearing an argument based on the truth of things, as opposed to the insulting and ridiculous defence put on.

No wonder the juror questions are harsh, they may as well have asked ALV if she thinks they are idiots, as that was pretty much the underlying message in all of them. No wonder Nurmi's gunning for a mistrial, the whole things a disaster, and you have to wonder at a defence team that didn't see this coming a mile off.

Note for next time Nurmi: Once you get your strategy together shell out for a focus group so you can get a little feedback on how things are going to go down, since clearly you have a hard time reading the writing on the wall yourself. Because you may not be able to get yourself out of this now, and it's not your head on the chopping block, it's your clients, and every future client is going to know about it.

I agree. They went the wrong direction in trying to garner sympathy from the jury. They tried to manipulate the jury to think that JA was in an abusive relationship. I think that this is a JA led defense though. She decided the direction she wanted to go and I don't think any atty would have been able to talk her out of it. Besides that, she wasn't going to admit to having any mental deficiencies on her part.

 

[rose222]

I Swanee when Juan is doing cross or recross or direct. ...I run like a crazy woman to go to the potty so I don't miss a moment Too funny

Here's my confession:

I'd rather run the risk of being somewhat dehydrated than miss a minute of JM! No fluids while JM is on. 'Nuh uh'. :what:

I like JM that much. Please don't judge me. Thank you. :blushing:

 

[Dmacky]

I have been looking forward to her testimony for a long, long time. Her credentials sound so much better than the other two "experts" - I think we will all be in for a real eye opener.

BTW Did they ever find who stole her laptop which had all her JA evaluation on it? Here's hoping she had it backed up on a flash drive.

JA probably had whoever helped her rob her "Paw Paw's" house steal it for her. Would not put ANYTHING past her , or her connections :furious:

 

[Boytwnmom]

Unfortunately, there are no logical answers. All I know is that trying to take AVL's expert testimony seriously required such a degree of cognitive dissonance that I feared ending up in a padded cell. It makes no sense because it makes no sense!

Just like the only evidence of Jodi's "fear" is Jodi saying she was afraid. That's it. Yet AVL had no problem adopting that as gospel truth. But Travis, even though he expressed fear to others was determined by AVL to not be really afraid. And the obvious stalking behavior of Jodi wasn't stalking because she'd already decided Travis was never afraid. And if Travis WAS afraid he would have gone to the police. The fact Jodi never went to the police, on the other hand, was further evidence of her actual fear. Double standard doesn't begin to describe it.

I could almost laugh her off as some irrelevant relic of obsolete thinking but her affirmative acts to help this murderer include the beyond abhorrent determination of pedophilia. That's just a bridge too far. I can even forgive her accepting Jodi's tales of physical violence but the pedophile stuff. I find it just too incredible that any psychological professional would not be able to discern that Travis's behavior was entirely inconsistent with someone who is a pedophile. That's something only someone truly evil could claim about the man she slaughtered.

FIRST: I am so sorry that you went through that with your ex. That's another reason why I believe that JA is lying when she says she was choked. She said she didn't have time to be scared, when she was asked how she felt. Huh? I watched my dad choke my mother once and everyone in that room (my brothers were there too) was scared, including my mother. JA doesn't know the proper way to be afraid of being choked because it never happened. IMO. I think it's ALV inserting her belief that JA didn't fight back because she didn't want to hurt him, just like she inserted her belief that TA was sexually degrading JA, despite the fact that she says JA never voiced that she felt that way to her. She used her "trained brain" to come up with that.

As far as ALV's testimony, I was really confused about the "stalking fear" vs the "domestic violence fear." She was saying that the fear is different, and that's why the fact that JA kept in contact with TA is different than TA keeping in contact with JA. She says that people normally report the stalking when they are fearful - but she is only an expert in women who are abused. She is no expert in men who are abused/stalked. She isn't considering how our society treats men who are victims. She herself doesn't believe that a man can be fearful of a woman, so imagine how TA would feel actually going to the police dept and saying, "I am scared of this woman." Not only that, I have a strong suspicion that he thought his fear of JA was illogical, and that's why he didn't do anything. I believe that that fear is based in how society trains men to regard women. He, like ALV and many other people, thought that because he's the man in the situation, there is no way he could not protect himself from JA if she tried something. I think his emotions were very conflicted on this. But, with ALV not really being an advocate for male victims, she can't see that as a possibility.

Another thing is that ALV is treating their relationship as if it was an actual relationship, where they were together as boyfriend/girlfriend. They weren't. The only time they were actually together as bf/gf was before she moved to Mesa. Once she got there, they were never in an exclusive relationship. She didn't live with him, she didn't have kids with him, she didn't rely on him for her survival or well being, so the only thing keeping her there was her desire to be with him. But, according to ALV, JA was uncomfortable with the things TA did almost from the start. That's when she was talking about the "power" TA had over JA. But, doesn't it make a difference if that woman isn't relying on that "power" in any way? Furthermore, women tend not to stay with men who turn them off at the very beginning because there is no emotional ties to him at that point. That's why I don't believe that JA had any problems with anything he did at the start, but is just using that to further sully TA's reputation and make herself out to be this naive victim who hardly knew what oral/@nal sex was until she met TA.

Then you consider that there has been no evidence that TA ever asked or begged JA back. No evidence that he followed her to CA to try to rekindle their relationship (unlike when JA actually moved states AFTER they broke up). No signs of him stalking JA, as ALV says is common when a man fears losing a girlfriend/wife. If he wanted JA back, he could have asked her to go to the Bahamas. What better way to get a woman back than to woo her with a fantasy vacation? This is where things really fall apart for me. TA was not acting like a man who couldn't let go of JA. He was acting like a man who was moving on. Without this element, doesn't it throw the entire idea of a "domestically abusive relationship" in the air?

This ended up a lot longer than I intended, it's just the more I think about the contradictions and double standards in ALV's testimony, the more I think that she used tunnel vision in "investigating" this case. I hope she learns something from it.

 

[katiecoolady]

Here's my confession:

I'd rather run the risk of being somewhat dehydrated than miss a minute of JM! No fluids while JM is on. 'Nuh uh'. :what:

I like JM that much. Please don't judge me. Thank you. :blushing:

That totally cracked me up! :floorlaugh: