weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #154

[AstroKitty]

There was dog named doggy boy that she kicked when she was thirteen, and she said he never seen again. She kicked him in anger when he tore up the trash that had her younger brother and sisters diapers and she had to pick them up. She told Detective Flores that it changed her world. The way she looked at the world had had changed. I think she killed him and her parents took him off.

When she was telling that story she said "maybe he died" and I knew he did die. When she's lying or giving possible reasons and things - she says "maybe" and "if" otherwise it's impossible to know when she's lying. I just don't see how her anger laid dormant all this time. I know people do snap (typically it's drugs and or a break) but in her case it was a slow build and it could have been anyone.

Someone else just wondered why she did it. My theory is that he was taking someone else to cancun (had they gone together?) and she didn't want that to happen. She went there with the intent to kill him. He wasn't "allowed" to move forward. He was "hers" and no one else's. That entire "If I can't have you then no one else can either" thing. i go back and forth about the sex prior. I wonder if they did have sex. I know it "looks" that way but it's hard telling. He had to know something was off when she arrived. Her car wasn't parked there, it wasn't the car he sold her and that had to be weird to him.

 

[G&AMom]

Thanks! I thought Dr. Carp dropped out from the case because she did not want to testify for JA. :drumroll:

Well, that's serious. :laughcry:

 

[bsk]

It doesn't make sense. The bear/tiger question isn't equatable to Arias being attacked by a stranger vs. Travis. It's not logical. A juror who isn't reasoned by sound logic may be more willing to believe nonsense if they're compelled emotionally-- and if that's the case, it's more likely they'll hold up deliberations. Ever met someone who just believes something is true no matter what facts exist to the contrary? They're unshakable.

If I'm reading it right, it sounds like they think she has PTSD and buy what Dr. Samuels was selling, ie "trauma is trauma". If they think she has PTSD, it's more likely they don't believe her Borderline Diagnosis, and do believe her "fog" story. It's problematic.

Possibly, but on the other hand maybe they wanted help on the gap between DeMarte and Samuels. He just blew it off, while she said the lie made the rest invalid. Perhaps the question amounted to "Is it ever valid to keep the results in that case, such as if the two traumas are similar?" (not that they are in this case, just in the question)

It could be that they wanted to be able to deal with a juror who fell for the trauma is trauma carp. Now they can say, "Look Dr Demarte said even if it was a tiger rather than a bear it kills the test, and this was WAY more different than that."

Or maybe there is some juror who's falling for it. I hope not.

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

So if a woman is willing to behave like a sex slave then by all means take advantage of it? No thanks. I have a daughter and I would love to meet the 'boyfriend' that knicknamed her the three hole wonder.

As a Mom I would inflict serious pain on anyone who insulted my daughter. But I respectfully submit that Travis didn't come up with that term out of the blue. It isn't as if JA didn't behave in ways that would call her self pride into question.
What goes on in anyone's bedroom is their business and I'm not a prude but JA crossed the line. Hijinks within a committed relationship is one thing. Being a bedroom circus performer aka booty call is another.
If it's a duck.....
I would be mortified to be JA's mother. Ashamed and embarrassed beyond words. JA is reaping what she so freely sowed.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

She is IMO the least professional female attorney I have ever seen. In her dress, her hair, and her attitude in the court room. Once in a TX court I saw a judge tell a female attorney to leave his court room and not return until she knew how to dress professionally and in a way that she could be taken as a serious proponent of justice. My mouth was wide open. The only thing I saw was her a-line periwinkle blue suit skirt was about 4 inches above her knees. And her hair was flowing down her back. And she did have some kick butt jewelry on. I will say that other female attorneys I had contact with wore darker colors and usually white or beige blouses. JW is not IMO a professional looking/acting attorney and I often wonder what the judge in TX would say. :moo:

I don't have a problem with her wardrobe. I think she dresses pretty professionally (although a little on the NG side with the big chunky necklaces). I just think her kinda snarky attitude is a bit abrasive. And she seems to be not very well prepared when she crosses the State's witnesses. She laughs and giggles at the State's witnesses like she thinks it's some kind of joke that they are systematically dismanteling her client's case.

Even though I find both of the defense attorneys pretty unprofessional in their behavior, I don't think the judge will throw JW out for wearing bad extensions, or KN for his shirt hanging out in the back. I'll leave it at that before I get myself a TO.

 

[Dana]

I don't think Jodi really believes in that law of attraction mumbo jumbo. That was Travis' thing. She adopted it like Mormonism, to please him.

In one of Jodi's blogs, I'll see if I can find it, she wrote that she no longer believes in the Laws of Attraction. I could be wrong but I THINK it was dated 6 months before she was arrested?

 

[G&AMom]

In one of Jodi's blogs, I'll see if I can find it, she wrote that she no longer believes in the Laws of Attraction. I could be wrong but I THINK it was dated 6 months before she was arrested?

Pretty sure you're right. Guess it wasn't working out for her.

 

[DAWN TREADER]

Personally I believe the evidence shows Jodi Arias planned and executed the murder of Travis Alexander out of supreme anger and hatred and had she not been arrested she may have had plans to act out her rage at others as well.

 

[ElleElle]

Yup she has. I think the crooked finger on the left wedding finger ring happened when she put she showed up at Travis' on Jun4.

She was returning the ring to him that she stole upon leaving AZ in April.

I bet she had the ring on the left ring finger and Travis tried to get it off her.

Does anyone know if her finger is *actually* mangled? I ask this because I rarely see it and I'd imagine it would make writing rather difficult. I know she states it happened in Jan and the prosecutors allude to it most likely happening the day TA was murdered. I'm thinking it could not be there or have happened in jail. Hasn't she been in a fight?

 

[GetSmart]

I thought it was his pastor who he had dinner with on Sundays,someone correct me if I am wrong.I thought I read the statement was made in a serious tone!Please someone correct me if I am wrong.I don't want to mislead anyone

This was too easy for me to furnish ....I have been using this as my siggy since I started following the trial !!

Jane Velez-Mitchell had an exclusive interview with Dr. Karl Hiatt, a close friend and mentor of Travis Alexander. Dr. Hiatt says Travis spoke to him about his relationship with Jodi Arias and even gave him an ominous warning.

Jodi Arias is accused of brutally murdering her ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander. Police say she stabbed him 29 times, slit his throat and shot him. Arias claims it was in self-defense.

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/01/11/did-travis-alexander-predict-his-own-death

 

[Dana]

Found it

JA blog about the Laws of Attraction

http://jodiarias.blogspot.com/2008/05/law-of-attraction-here-we-go-again.html

Sorry, I misspoke - it was dated May 4th 2008

 

[Midnight Meddler]

BBM
I thought I was the only one that noticed that! Are we gonna get in trouble? Hope it's not against the rules to state the obvious. :blushing:

LOL! :seeya:

 

[DebinGA]

Jw was vicious in her attack of DD

JW was inexplicably, stupidly vicious. "How do you know Travis didn't delete the pics? Were you there?" Sheesh

 

[MrW]

I see discussion from time to time of how a juror's age or gender might affect his/her thinking about the some witnesses/the defendant. I am a male, mid 50's (old enough to be JA's or Dr.D;s father). I am well educated, but more importantly, I try to use common sense in my approach to life situations.

1) As for Dr. DeMarte, I find her much more honest and credible than the older, more experienced "experts" with their agendas. I have colleagues of all ages, and base my opinions based on how they do their job rather than their age. I watched almost every minute she was on the stand. Yes, she was assured, but not cocky IMO. She was steady, professional, and easy for me to follow. Even during the most excruciating moments of cross-examination, I was impressed by her demeanor. She presented concise information, gathered through established protocols, and without any of the hugger-muggery (I love that term!!) exhibited by certain other witnesses. There is no doubt in my mind as to which expert testimony receives the most weight in this case.

2) If I were a juror, I would not grant any leniency to any defendant based on age/gender/appearance. I do not care what disorders may or may not be present. As long as the defendant is not clinically insane or intellectually deficient (which JA is NOT) and thus knows the difference between right and wrong (which JA DOES), I could impartially evaluate guilt/innocence.

Granted, I would not have been a “pristine” juror from the start, because of family history with a person very similar to JA and some other disordered people in my life experience. Through those experiences I learned that I could drive myself nuts trying to make sense of their nonsense. I have tried to stay focused on the evidence; in doing so, I have disregarded probably 99% or more of the rubbish that spewed from JA’s mouth.

I seem to have written a mini-novel here, all to say that I hope and pray the jury applies common sense in reaching a verdict. I hope they keep focus on the evidence. All of this is my moderately old man's opinion. That would be IMMOMO... :floorlaugh: (That’s why I don’t post much, because I get wound up and can’t stop… sorry…)

 

[katiecoolady]

She's been in prison for 5 years... look at her at the beginning of January and compare to April.

imo, she is losing weight quickly.

I'm pretty sure I found it...just as quickly : /

 

[ClosArgs]

In one of Jodi's blogs, I'll see if I can find it, she wrote that she no longer believes in the Laws of Attraction. I could be wrong but I THINK it was dated 6 months before she was arrested?

IIRC she said she had decided to quit it, but after this time she realized it was stilll viable to her. She stated it kept on happening, meaning she was still hooked on this philosophy.

 

[G&AMom]

I see discussion from time to time of how a juror's age or gender might affect his/her thinking about the some witnesses/the defendant. I am a male, mid 50's (old enough to be JA's or Dr.D;s father). I am well educated, but more importantly, I try to use common sense in my approach to life situations.

1) As for Dr. DeMarte, I find her much more honest and credible than the older, more experienced "experts" with their agendas. I have colleagues of all ages, and base my opinions based on how they do their job rather than their age. I watched almost every minute she was on the stand. Yes, she was assured, but not cocky IMO. She was steady, professional, and easy for me to follow. Even during the most excruciating moments of cross-examination, I was impressed by her demeanor. She presented concise information, gathered through established protocols, and without any of the hugger-muggery (I love that term!!) exhibited by certain other witnesses. There is no doubt in my mind as to which expert testimony receives the most weight in this case.

2) If I were a juror, I would not grant any leniency to any defendant based on age/gender/appearance. I do not care what disorders may or may not be present. As long as the defendant is not clinically insane or intellectually deficient (which JA is NOT) and thus knows the difference between right and wrong (which JA DOES), I could impartially evaluate guilt/innocence.

Granted, I would not have been a “pristine” juror from the start, because of family history with a person very similar to JA and some other disordered people in my life experience. Through those experiences I learned that I could drive myself nuts trying to make sense of their nonsense. I have tried to stay focused on the evidence; in doing so, I have disregarded probably 99% or more of the rubbish that spewed from JA’s mouth.

I seem to have written a mini-novel here, all to say that I hope and pray the jury applies common sense in reaching a verdict. I hope they keep focus on the evidence. All of this is my moderately old man's opinion. That would be IMMOMO... :floorlaugh: (That’s why I don’t post much, because I get wound up and can’t stop… sorry…)

You can write all the novels you want, Mr. W. I'm still laughing over the story of your elderly relative and the arsonist.

 

[Dana]

I see discussion from time to time of how a juror's age or gender might affect his/her thinking about the some witnesses/the defendant. I am a male, mid 50's (old enough to be JA's or Dr.D;s father). I am well educated, but more importantly, I try to use common sense in my approach to life situations.

1) As for Dr. DeMarte, I find her much more honest and credible than the older, more experienced "experts" with their agendas. I have colleagues of all ages, and base my opinions based on how they do their job rather than their age. I watched almost every minute she was on the stand. Yes, she was assured, but not cocky IMO. She was steady, professional, and easy for me to follow. Even during the most excruciating moments of cross-examination, I was impressed by her demeanor. She presented concise information, gathered through established protocols, and without any of the hugger-muggery (I love that term!!) exhibited by certain other witnesses. There is no doubt in my mind as to which expert testimony receives the most weight in this case.

2) If I were a juror, I would not grant any leniency to any defendant based on age/gender/appearance. I do not care what disorders may or may not be present. As long as the defendant is not clinically insane or intellectually deficient (which JA is NOT) and thus knows the difference between right and wrong (which JA DOES), I could impartially evaluate guilt/innocence.

Granted, I would not have been a “pristine” juror from the start, because of family history with a person very similar to JA and some other disordered people in my life experience. Through those experiences I learned that I could drive myself nuts trying to make sense of their nonsense. I have tried to stay focused on the evidence; in doing so, I have disregarded probably 99% or more of the rubbish that spewed from JA’s mouth.

I seem to have written a mini-novel here, all to say that I hope and pray the jury applies common sense in reaching a verdict. I hope they keep focus on the evidence. All of this is my moderately old man's opinion. That would be IMMOMO... :floorlaugh: (That’s why I don’t post much, because I get wound up and can’t stop… sorry…)

Love your post and love your input!!
But please don't talk about yourself as old.....that makes me old too and I consider myself 39 .............for the 18th time lol

 

[IBsleuthin]

I'm thinking of changing my name to 'OutOnALimb'...because here I go...

The other day we were all guessing about Miss JA's natural cycle.

Someone was posting the dates she has been out sick during this trial and how they correlated with this week when she was looking very peaked.

So extrapolating that further,

How would these dates relate to the date Travis was killed? Could she have been in a premenstrual rage?

Just thinking about how humiliating this party with the Christmas tree must have been, can you even IMAGINE showing up and announcing that you were his girlfriend and he tells you to leave and you sleep under the Christmas tree???

I don't know why I didn't think of this before but this DT would have been FAR better off going with THIS diagnosis.

Premenstrual dysphoric disorder

You combine THIS with BPD? You have one dangerous, volatile person. This I can actually believe.

I want justice for Travis and I want to support him. None of us are perfect and some of his behavior was certainly less than nice.

He was teasing a crocodile while swimming.

 

[G&AMom]

I'm pretty sure I found it...just as quickly : /

:floorlaugh: If only we could all hack off a few pounds and send it to her!