04/22/2013 - waiting for rebuttal to continue

[Hopeful One]

Morning nurse:seeya: It is a great morning. Sun is shining and mild temps. Patio doors are open and the birds are chirping. Puppy is happily playing. Lifes small pleasures. Pleasures no doubt here Jodi will never enjoy again.

I am sooo jealous of your weather!! We can't seem to shake winter here. Yesterday was sunny and 60 but today we're back to cold (48 degrees), cloudy and rainy. Makes me want to dunk my head in a bucket of emu meat.

 

[kaRN]

Okay, but aren't they kind of mutually exclusive as far as defending yourself in court goes? That's what has me confused. Have the prior defense witnesses said anything that could be used to uphold this claim? If she's battered, what difference does it make whether she was "inspired to great fury" -- I mean, why bring it up at all, if that were the case? She was battered. <snort> It just seems to me, if I were a juror, that I would feel I hadn't heard a single thing that indicates heat of moment.

If the jurors believe she was a battered woman then they have to determine if it was self defense or crime of passion from the position of a battered womans frame of reference. It won't work anyway. TA's hands and back say otherwise as do Ja's lies IMO.

 

[LambChop]

I don't think that's his purpose. I think he's going to look at the test results of Dr. Demarte and testify that he interprets them differently. He'll hone in on the PTSD part. I could be wrong.

Also, that expert on the ABC site you posted mentioned the judge could decide very limited testimony from Geffner. I think that's what will happen, but then JM will skewer his testimony - he'll show the jury that Geffner was already coined a "hired gun" by another trial court, that Geffner edited one of ALV's books, etc. The fact that Geffner has a horse in this race (ALV's reputation) is fodder for JM.

JMO

Isn't this all a moot point now that defense never put on an ME to dispute what Dr. Horn claims happened, that she stabbed him in the chest first? This is the only testimony regarding what came first, the gun or the stabbing, other than Jodi's word. ME is staying she stabbed him first and defense can't prove otherwise so doesn't that rule out any PTSD since she knew enough to lie about the sequence of events?????

 

[Nhic]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[YESorNO]

Good morning!! Trial today!!! :woot:

Morning HO. We are all excited. :seeya:

 

[Words2Serve]

My personal opinion is the jury questions indicate they are tired of all the psychologists... I feel they see through them all as bias 'opinions' and even with Dr. D answering questions the best, they have heard that they were all restricted or chose to only base their testimony on 'certain data'.

They have all only succeeded at proving JA and TA were in an extremely unhealthy and volatile relationship. They can see that both sides had reason to be upset; does not prove pre-med, self-defense, or 'snapping'. I was hoping JM was going to poke more holes in the fog story.

JM needs to drive home the Gas can evidence, renting the car, the perfect closet, all of the pre-meditation, and it does not matter if she had a plan on how to clean up, it matters that she succeeded at killing. He needs to start discounting all of her testimony that has been made to be 'assumed' fact to this point. He needs to remind the jury there were no marks on her from a struggle the fact of her behavior through testimony, video, etc. I know he did it earlier but he needs to do it again, now that they have seen JA testify.

Enough with psychology, most of the jury probably feels like they could fit into most of the categories, and probably at this point all feel they suffer from PTSD...

 

[Hopeful One]

I think those marks might be skin slippage but I'm guessing. His head was slightly forward in the shower and it could be where skin was in contact with skin. I know when you prepare a body to go to the morgue, you have to be very careful how you place the hands so as not to leave marks visible later.

I've always thought it was skin slippage as well. I think you're right.

 

[Sleuth5]

Glorious good morning to all! What's that I smell this morning? Breakfast and... gasoline?

 

[Hopeful One]

Morning HO. We are all excited. :seeya:

I'm not a morning person but this had me jumping out of bed today! (I'm a nerd)

 

[Nhic]

Isn't this all a moot point now that defense never put on an ME to dispute what Dr. Horn claims happened, that she stabbed him in the chest first? This is the only testimony regarding what came first, the gun or the stabbing, other than Jodi's word. ME is staying she stabbed him first and defense can't prove otherwise so doesn't that rule out any PTSD since she knew enough to lie about the sequence of events?????

It's all smoke and mirrors from the DT. Their goal is to keep JA off death row. A 2nd degree conviction would be a win for them and if they get it they'll do the talk show rounds ASAP. :furious:

The more bs they throw at the wall, the more they hope will stick. The more time spent talking about expert this or that, totally unrelated to the brutal slaughter of TA, the more "confused" they hope the jury will be.

JMO

 

[leebee52]

I smell Juan in the air

 

[Hopeful One]

Glorious good morning to all! What's that I smell this morning? Breakfast and... gasoline?

Yes, I believe there is a slow burn beginning...

 

[kaydono]

O/T but pre trial, I am enjoying Janine Driver on Anderson Cooper Live right now.

GRRRRRRRR @ Anderson Live not coming on here, until 1pm. I wanted to watch it.

 

[missnoire]

I wasn't concerned about the verdict until yesterday. Now the defense wants a sur rebuttal, which is ridiculous considering they knew what DD was going to testify to and now they want manslaughter listed in juror instructions. Are you serious? So basically it's saying, "Hey, if you don't believe self defense, at least believe it wasn't planned. Oh, if it's too brutal for self defense, let's call it a crime of passion." It's crazy.

I also only started watching during the defense's case, so I missed that DH testified about the bullet passing through the brain, but it wasn't in the report and that Flores had some super tough juror questions. Am I worried about nothing here? Is there anything I missed that is good for Jodi?

 

[kaydono]

I smell Juan in the air

What does he smell like? Do tell......... :floorlaugh:

 

[ShadyLady]

How can I set more posts to show on one page?

 

[BritsKate]

The Hounslow Slasher benefitted from the "humanitarian" system aye ?

Sadly, over here 18 years is nearly exorbitant. I've read of sentences for 8 months time for raping a 3 year old girl and murder sentences 7-10 years aren't all that uncommon either. And then there's Brian Blackwell, who brutally slaughtered his elderly parents who were threatening to stop being his personal piggy bank. He had a murder charge reduced to manslaughter on the basis of narcissistic personality disorder. He was sentenced to life in prison - which very rarely ever actually means life in prison, with the exception of a whole life tariff, which offenders under 21 can't be sentenced to.

In 2008 a new prison was built in Scotland with private in-cell showers, flatscreen tv's in cells, electronic kiosks to check daily menus, library, computer room, fitness suite, and gym. Granted, not all prisons are like that but it goes some way to express a big cultural difference.

 

[raisincharlie]

It will be interesting to see when he examined her, if he did. After the other three experts testified? Hmm - fit the hand to the glove much?

Lets see:

Dr. Samuels - interviewed her and didn't care that she was untruthful, it made no difference to him or to his outcome after calculating it 3 times.

Ms. ALV - interviewed her, apologized to her, and swallowed the lies hook line and sinker.

Dr. DeMarte - interviewed her and did not buy the lies.

New Dr. - hmmmm - anything would just be a guess but he rather sounds like a clone of Park Dietz. Hired gun - proven.

 

[YESorNO]

It will be interesting to see when he examined her, if he did. After the other three experts testified? Hmm - fit the hand to the glove much?

BBM That was good :floorlaugh:

 

[rose222]

My personal opinion is the jury questions indicate they are tired of all the psychologists... I feel they see through them all as bias 'opinions' and even with Dr. D answering questions the best, they have heard that they were all restricted or chose to only base their testimony on 'certain data'.

They have all only succeeded at proving JA and TA were in an extremely unhealthy and volatile relationship. They can see that both sides had reason to be upset; does not prove pre-med, self-defense, or 'snapping'. I was hoping JM was going to poke more holes in the fog story.

JM needs to drive home the Gas can evidence, renting the car, the perfect closet, all of the pre-meditation, and it does not matter if she had a plan on how to clean up, it matters that she succeeded at killing. He needs to start discounting all of her testimony that has been made to be 'assumed' fact to this point. He needs to remind the jury there were no marks on her from a struggle the fact of her behavior through testimony, video, etc. I know he did it earlier but he needs to do it again, now that they have seen JA testify.

Enough with psychology, most of the jury probably feels like they could fit into most of the categories, and probably at this point all feel they suffer from PTSD...

I agree with you. Even Demarte did come off as a little biased. I think the juror who asked the bear/tiger question just wanted to know whether both situations (regardless of different triggers etc.) could cause PTSD. Answer is yes. Tiger, bear, Ninja attack, self-defense...they can all cause PSTD. A cold blooded-murder? Not so much) Anyway Demarte was good but I agree that the jurors are sick of all these psychologists.

Hopefully we will get to the premeditation today and stick with that throughout rebuttal.