04/22/2013 - waiting for rebuttal to continue

[ILikeToBendPages]

So what happened to Jodi making a decision to kill Travis to save her sorry life in self defense?

One thing that was brought out last week by Dr.JD was Jodi and her anger and poor impulse controls. She's kicked walls and doors, a dog and her mother that we know about. This jury has heard all of this from Jodi's own writings. They've seen Jodi out and out lie on the stand and to their faces. They asked her how she decides when to lie and she said she tells the truth under oath.

What pissed me off is the threat of if I don't get my way I'm going to smear Travis's good name, and now pulling this crap. I hate her more each day.

Insert Chevy Chases Tylenol rant here.

 

[Bernina]

They've been available all along. There was nothing new today that I saw and I'm saving the ones I did see for the next lull in conversation leading to a prolonged "sphincter" discussion

That's just prolonging our agony!!! Does this include JM's 16th supplemental to the rebuttal witness list? I have yet to find the actual document anywhere! And live 3 hours away from Phoenix and it's not worth the drive:truce:

 

[KathrynL]

This part is kind of a sticking point for me. Anyone else?

[If you determine that the defendant is guilty of either second degree murder or manslaughter but you have a reasonable doubt as to which it was, you must find the defendant guilty of manslaughter.]

http://www.azbar.org/media/292098/2011_cumulative_supplement.pdf

That part is troubling as applied to JA. I just do not see a reasonable interpretation of the evidence that gives her manslaughter. Perhaps the judge will decide giving this instruction is unreasonable too. Here's hoping.....

I even copied the explanation from the clerks office of Maricopa County Court for you a few days ago and I'm not doing it again. You're wrong.
The State (01) against Jodia Arias (2)

Please read the legal thread.

I did not know that, thank-you! Now I will have an easier time reading the case record.

 

[Karmady]

do you have a link,i cant find anything on google.

No, you have to get them in person. I think some may have been published on the net (tesoro/wal-mart?), but most have not afaik.

 

[dani]

Maybe the DT just wants to make sure the jury has all the options just in case they dont believe she killed Travis in Self defense and actually lied and killed him due to being jealous about going to cancun with another woman. The more they can make crap up and confuse the more chance she will get off. Wasn't that Baez's trick?[/QUOTE]

BBM: Better known as the "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, then baffle 'em with bull-poopies" defense. :seeya:

(Doing my best Horace Finklestein impression) I don't like Nurmi-Wilmot!

 

[Aliz488]

Sorry about mentioning that NAME!!!! I didn't know that PLEASE FORGIVE MY TRUE IGNORANCE ABOUT SUCH RULE!!!

 

[Love Never Fails]

They've been available all along. There was nothing new today that I saw and I'm saving the ones I did see for the next lull in conversation leading to a prolonged "sphincter" discussion

Aw Karmady, you're killing me. Please, please tell me. You can IM me.lease:

 

[kaRN]

11.03A2
−
Manslaughter by Sudden Quarrel
or Heat of Passion
The crime of manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion requires proof that:
1.
a. The defendant intentionally killed another person;
or
b. The defendant caused the death of another person by conduct which the
defendant knew would cause death or serious physical injury;
or
c. Under circumstances which showed an extreme indifference to human life, the
defendant caused the death of another person by consciously disregarding a
grave risk of death. The risk must be such that disregarding it
was a gross deviation from what a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation would have done;
and
2. The defendant acted upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion;
and
3. The sudden quarrel or heat of passion resulted from adequate provocation by the
person who was killed.
[It is no defense that the defendant was unaware of the risk solely by reason of
intoxication.]
“Adequate provocation” means conduct or circumstances sufficient to deprive a
reasonable person of self control. Words alone are not adequate provocation to justify
reducing an intentional killing to manslaughter. [There must not have been a “cooling off”
period between the provocation and the killing. A “cooling off” period is the time it would
take a reasonable person to regain selfcontrol under the circumstances.]
[
If you determine that the defendant is guilty of either second degree murder or
manslaughter but you have a reasonable doubt as to which it was, you must find the
defendant guilty of manslaughter

Words alone are NOT ADEQUATE PROVOCATION to justify reducing an intentional killing to manslaughter!!! She so corrected JW so many times that he said "Effing kill you B*" AFTER she had already started rolling/running away and according to this...The sudden quarrel or heat of passion resulted from adequate provocation by the
person who was killed. AND There must not have been a “cooling off”
period between the provocation and the killing. A “cooling off” period is the time it would
take a reasonable person to regain selfcontrol under the circumstances.][/B][/B]

I shower or bathe to cool off all the time. Usually works unless a stalker comes in trying to photograph me. :drumroll: Thanks for posting that!!

 

[GreenEyesBlue]

In researching Dr. Geffner on http://www.fvsai.org/aboutus.htm it seems he would be more likely to testify about DV rather than the legitimacy of the BPD dx, but who knows. Regardless, I have a hard time seeing how the defense can claim any information to be new thus allowing a sur-rebuttal since they've had Dr. DeMarte's report for over a year now. I don't remember the DT bringing up in cross with Dr.JD that she testified to something not in the report either...seems like just another one of those motions made for the sake of making the motion imho

My understanding is that surrebuttal would be very limited to something new that was brought up. Such as if they had a witness that could rebut the testimony of JA stealing the ring. I would not think they could try to rebut the BPD because they have known that for years.

Also, if they are bringing in an expert, he/she would have to have been listed by the defense previously.

 

[Sleuth5]

Sorry about mentioning that NAME!!!! I didn't know that PLEASE FORGIVE MY TRUE IGNORANCE ABOUT SUCH RULE!!!

:floorlaugh:

 

[Sydni]

But he never evaluated JA..........WTH?

This is why JSS (I hope and pray) will not allow this surrebuttal. It does not make sense to me that this could be an issue on appeal because .... oh carp ..... I just don't know what to think anymore.

I agree with one poster here that the DT is trying to exhaust this jury and and attempting to get a mistrial. Ooooo big surprise!!

I, myself, am exhausted and almost totally intellectually depleted. I can hardly wrap my brain around all of the shenanigans that have been going on in the past ... and currently. I'm almost ready to check out. I have been so invested in this trial and achieving justice for Travis, but I can barely keep up. I think about the family and then I think ... well, if they can stay strong ... maybe I should too ... but it really is affecting my life. My daily life is falling apart. I don't answer the phone ... the door .... I get annoyed if anyone talks to me while I'm listening to something on HLN or reading Websleuths. I am a hot mess!!

I think I wanna quit .... but I have an addictive personality. Do I have any support out there? HEEEELLLLLPPP !!

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Defense #6: Sleepwalking defense

Defense #7: Twinkie defense

Defense #8: JA's evil unknown until now twin murdered TA


When will this end? :furious:

Defense #8 might actually fly: Jodi's mother is a twin, and twins often beget twins. :floorlaugh: Skeery to even think about that possibility.

 

[Sleuth5]

I shower or bathe to cool off all the time. Usually works unless a stalker comes in trying to photograph me. :drumroll: Thanks for posting that!!

Yeah, I hate it when that happens.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I wonder what the Casey jurors think now ... they must know that their verdict damaged everyone's faith in the system to the point where now there's never confidence in a conviction, if anyone says anything that sounds assured someone else instantly pops in with the ever helpful 'Remember the Casey verdict .. we were all sure about that one'.

Do they sit at home and think .. 'Doh!'?

 

[Aliz488]

I think if this new witness is allowed. THEN JUAN SHOULD BE ABLE TO BRING UP EVERY INCIDENT OF JODI STALKING!!!!THIS JUDGE NEEDS TO LET ALL IN NOW!!!

 

[Midnight Meddler]

http://www.fvsai.org/aboutus.htm


The Institute on Violence, Abuse and Trauma (IVAT) strives to be a comprehensive resource, training and research center dealing with all aspects of violence, abuse and trauma. IVAT interfaces with Alliant International University’s academic schools and centers, which provide resource support and educational training. Through a focus on collaborations with various partnering organizations, IVAT desires to bridge gaps and help improve current systems of care on a local, national, and global level.

snipped

Robert Geffner, Ph.D. ABPP, ABPN
Founding President
Robert Geffner, Ph.D., is: Founding President of the Family Violence and Sexual Assault Institute in San Diego, CA; Founding President of Alliant International University’s (AIU) Institute on Violence, Abuse and Trauma (IVAT); Clinical Research Professor of Psychology at the California School of Professional Psychology, AIU, San Diego; Licensed Psychologist and Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist in California and Texas; Editor of three internationally disseminated journals and Co-Editor of one; and former clinical director of a large private practice mental health clinic in East Texas for over 15 years. He has a Diplomate in Clinical Neuropsychology and one in Family Psychology. He served as an adjunct faculty member for the National Judicial College for 10 years, and was a former Professor of Psychology at the University of Texas at Tyler for 16 years. Dr. Geffner is the President of the Trauma Psychology Division of the American Psychological Association. He has been a researcher, trainer, practitioner, and consultant for more than 30 years.

snipped

I hope Juan asks him if he considers himself an "expert" in abuse. LOL

The Institute on Violence, Abuse, and Trauma - What's that? Some kind of Vo-tech Center? Oh brother.....

 

[aa9511]

Thanks much for the link. I see the charge states that words alone are not sufficient provocation under the charge. I know JA laid it on thick with both the words she attributed to TA, and the choking/slapping/wrist-grabbing in the past and the infamous Tinkerbell linebacker tackle on the day she murdered him. With everything in front of the jury (interrogation video, 48 Hours, JA's testibaloney, etc) I would hope the jury wouldn't go for this Hail Mary defense pass. Also that they will notice the obvious shift in the defense theory and see it for what it is. I will be :scared: until I hear a nice 1st degree murder verdict-hopefully sometime before I die of old age.

This got me thinking that I WISH one of the juror questions to Jodi would have been:
"Ms. Arias, since you know ALL the evidence which is available to be presented in this case by both you and the State, have had access to all trancripts, reports, photos, text messages, recordings, e-mails, and other writings in this case (for many years now), have listened to all other testimony by witnesses in this case, and know which evidence will NOT be allowed to be presented in this case, AND seeing the investment that you have biased for a certain ultimate result in the casedo you think this makes you a credible witness?"

This in additional to all her lies should make the jury disregard her whole testimony, IMO.

 

[Sleuth5]

This is why JSS (I hope and pray) will not allow this surrebuttal. It does not make sense to me that this could be an issue on appeal because .... oh carp ..... I just don't know what to think anymore.

I agree with one poster here that the DT is trying to exhaust this jury and and attempting to get a mistrial. Ooooo big surprise!!

I, myself, am exhausted and almost totally intellectually depleted. I can hardly wrap my brain around all of the shenanigans that have been going on in the past ... and currently. I'm almost ready to check out. I have been so invested in this trial and achieving justice for Travis, but I can barely keep up. I think about the family and then I think ... well, if they can stay strong ... maybe I should too ... but it really is affecting my life. My daily life is falling apart. I don't answer the phone ... the door .... I get annoyed if anyone talks to me while I'm listening to something on HLN or reading Websleuths. I am a hot mess!!

I think I wanna quit .... but I have an addictive personality. Do I have any support out there? HEEEELLLLLPPP !!

If you're asking whether or not you have company in your addiction, I should think the answer is pretty obvious here. :seeya:

 

[seguek9]

You might benefit from this tip.

14th favorite book (well..."trilogy" :giggle: of all time)

 

[Mellinyce]

use a picture, melinyce. It's therapeutic.