A view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #2

[Paintr]

I realize the cases are entirely different. You have posted this time and time again. We get it. And I am not trying to be snarky here, but for most of us, the CA case had just as much evidence (albeit circumstantial) as this case. Most of us felt it in our BONES that she would be found guilty. I lived that case for 3 years. Inside and out. With a lot of WSrs. It was a SHOCK to have a not guilty verdict returned when most people KNEW she should have been found guilty.

People are gun shy. You can't blame them. I am one of them. The CA case proved that no matter how much you BELIEVE the case is a winner, the outcome is truly never predictable because there is an unknown factor...the jury.

That's all. Don't want to OT this thread. Sorry but just wanted you to understand that most of us feel just as strongly about that other case as you do this one.

Thank you kindly for saying that so well! :rocker: I agree with EVERY word!

 

[PASA]

This was my question a few pages back. Just thought I would bump it as it might have been skipped with the discussions going on.

I wonder about this now more then ever after today. I guess it's just my mind trying to figure out who asked what. Sometimes I felt like the real detailed stuff was from our stenographer but you never know. Some people don't need to take notes to ask really important questions. Anyway.... My question is BBM.

:seeya:

From my experience, all of the jurors perk up when Juan is asking the questions.
Nurmi's style doesn't have much energy and I think that is why people lose interest after a short while.

Nurmi, has more energy when he's "objecting" than when he is questioning.

Meant to add, when Nurmi objects it is much louder and quite clear inside the courtroom. When
I watch on the feed it's barely audible (to me).
MOO

 

[Shelby1]

I have a glass of red wine....I'm heading upstairs to bed with my iPhone to read up and my bra will be hanging on the bathroom door knob in about 7 minutes.

 

[AZWatcher]

From my experience, all of the jurors perk up when Juan is asking the questions.
Nurmi's style doesn't have much energy and I think that is why people lose interest after a short while.

Nurmi, has more energy when he's "objecting" than when he is questioning.
MOO

Makes sense to me. Have you ever had someone lie to your face and hope that they just went on and on?

 

[katiecoolady]

Hi Honeys I'm home.

Popped off the bra and also a bottle of what I believe is a pretty expensive bottle of Old Vine Zinfandel that someone brought as a gift. Can you all just pat yourselves on the back here for a moment and say you're worth it? Cuz I sure think you are. So.....here we go....

I get to the courthouse and there's my girl PASA over there. Let me tell you, PASA texts me all day when I'm not able to attend court sessions so she's been my go to person for weeks now. Three cheers for PASA! Let's all give her a pat on the back while we're at it.

I walk in right along side jurors Barb and Poquito (reminder I use Anita Richman's nicknames some of which I've forgotten but will refer to as there were some real standout jurors today).

I get upstairs and realize DAMMIT I've forgotten my journal (for taking notes) so hoof it back downstairs in my heels to walk a block away to grab it and back in . This time though I get to walk in with Beth who gives me a big hug and I also run in to my buddy Jake who's admonished by a Judge in the security line for talking about the case. Jake and I both get in the elevator with Tri color and he makes a joke with her. Jake is very gregarious and funny.

SO....we make it in to the courtroom. We almost don't get seats as it's pretty packed on T's side. Which is good...we want it packed there. I see many new faces journalist wise. Some TV guy I don't know but he looks like MR. Big from SATC. swoon

So I'm sitting there getting organized as usual. Water, mints, journal, lip gloss and someone taps me on the shoulder from behind. I'm in the second seat in on the second row by the wall. I turn around only to see THE MAN himself Mr. Juan Martinez flashing me a smile asking if it's ok if his friend takes the seat next to me. He jokes and says "take good care of him now".then he makes a joke with Jake who he knows personally. I'm sort of stunned. I introduce myself to the friend (talk to him more later) and immediately log on to tell you guys of my close encounter with Sr. Martinez. Swoon again............ok will leave it on that before the next page and in the meantime find my lost cursor which isn't even on this page........:seeya:

 

[katiedid2]

Jean c said on ng that these questions were in Jodie's favor?

 

[MeeBee]

JC reads this as jurors are transfixed by her. But the questions...whoo. They ain't buying it.

 

[ilovewings]

BBM

2 words.

Casey Anthony.

It isn't only Casey Anthony; remember Lana Clarkson? i watched that trial and thought, who in God's green earth would believe the woman killed herself in Spector's house, a man she knew for 5 minutes? well, one juror bought it and there was a mistrial the first time around. Then there was the Durst case; he murdered and decapitated some stranger, pleaded self defense and was acquitted. Who would have ever believed such verdicts could happen? then of course there was Casey Anthony. Jurys are unpredictable. I do believe she will be found guilty of first degree murder but I wouldnt bet my last paycheck on it.

 

[Madeleine74]

If we go by your theory that a guilty verdict is a guarantee, why watch at all?

No verdict is ever a guarantee when one is dealing with a jury. But believing in the strength of the case and believing in the talent of the prosecution and feeling assured that the truth is coming out and being seen is powerful. Witnessing Juan Martinez work for justice for TA and TA's family is a very positive thing for me.

 

[momtective]

Wow 79 members and 99 guests in here right now!

C'mon in guests and join the conversation! Membership is quick and painless and we'd love to have you join the conversation. :wave:

:thewave:​

 

[hindsight2020]

I realize the cases are entirely different. You have posted this time and time again. We get it. And I am not trying to be snarky here, but for most of us, the CA case had just as much evidence (albeit circumstantial) as this case. Most of us felt it in our BONES that she would be found guilty. I lived that case for 3 years. Inside and out. With a lot of WSrs. It was a SHOCK to have a not guilty verdict returned when most people KNEW she should have been found guilty.

People are gun shy. You can't blame them. I am one of them. The CA case proved that no matter how much you BELIEVE the case is a winner, the outcome is truly never predictable because there is an unknown factor...the jury.

That's all. Don't want to OT this thread. Sorry but just wanted you to understand that most of us feel just as strongly about that other case as you do this one.

No disrespect but CA case has absolutely nothing to do with JA case. Although, we can never predict what a jury will do, there is absolutely no comparison. <modsnip>
__________________

 

[LambChop]

I felt a jolt too. I was afraid it was the juror possibly offering up a reason for what was otherwise implausible.

The juror could have been thinking as I was. She got by him without him trying to stop her and got into the closet before she heard him coming down the hall when the door from the closet to the bathroom was open and right there. Did he look at the camera and decide it was fine and was just going after her because he yelled at her and scared her. I think this juror is thinking if there is some truth to her story did she overreact and kill him when all Travis wanted to do was tell her the camera was fine? Could be wrong, but that would be my first thought. She had to run right by him why wouldn't he grab her if he had thrown her down and wanted to hurt her??????

 

[katiecoolady]

Ok on to my notes...

There are some space issues so we have to move JM's friend up to the front row so I can't chat with him as much but I do at the first break or shall I say "issue with technical difficulties".

He's been a friend of JM for 20 years but hasn't been in this courtroom. He describes him as a "pit bull" and agrees that the real case will be tried in the rebuttal case. (he agrees with me I mean lol).

Nicole says to Jake and I if it ever goes to overflow she will place us i the victim room where we can watch the live feed on the monitor. That's fine with me!

There is a technical difficulty with the micro phone.

Both sides are up with the Judge. Nurmi is yawning.

Jury comes half way in then has to make an about face and leave...why we wonder? Then realize JA isn't on the stand yet. Poquito was blowing air out of puffed cheeks as they are led back out.

JA limps more across the room swiftly then takes the stand with her rumpled cream colored blouse.

ZERO jury eye contact as they walk back in.

I can't see most of the jurors faces well from this seat but I see Pony tail and Maureen well as well as all the jurors on the end. As time goes on, I end up being able to see the face of almost all the jurors on the back row. Maybe because I'm invading Jake's space who's to my right.

 

[nawd68]

there is always some truth to every lie. I believe she did drop the camera .... but on purpose because he probably bought it to take to Cancun, she was outraged by that fact. So some of it is more likely the truth, but rearranged for her benefit.

Interesting. I've thought that at one time perhaps Travis did actually tell her "a five year old could hold a camera better." It seems like an odd thing to make up.

 

[DeAnnaMisrahi]

I was sick after the OJ trial debacle. It was awful. But I knew it was that case, with that defendant, and that jury, in that jurisdiction that created THAT outcome.

(respectfully snipped)

I didn't follow that case, (I was a teen, in school) I know a lot of people thought that OJ would be found guilty, and that the majority think he is guilty. I know that they mostly blame the jury for him getting away with it. I blamed them, by default, based upon others perceptions. Once I got older, and read up about the trial, I stopped blaming the jury. I know this won't be a popular opinion, but it was the LAPD and the prosecution that gave that case away. In any other case, I would be disturbed if people overlooked the gross lack of competence displayed by detectives and their crime scene techs, and the tampering with evidence, and still found the defendent guilty. It also gave me cause to fear that maybe others were prosecuted by this county, who may truly be innocent, but dont' have the money to afford a "Dream Team." i

So, for ME, the OJ verdict doesn't play into why I am anxious about the outcome of this case not being favorable. I haven't seen that kind of incompetence on display from the prosecution of Jodi Arias.

:moo::moo:

 

[pinkie60]

i think jodi invented the camera dropping scenario to match the digital photos taken. there were shots of travis in the shower, then all of a sudden the camera went out of focus, there was a ceiling shot, and then travis on the floor iirc. she wouldn't say that the camera went out of focus because she was attacking travis, so she said the camera dropped and he attacked her. if it wasn't for the photos, i'd hate to think of the convoluted story she'd dream up.

 

[katiecoolady]

Page 3

It would be awesome for ease of reading if you guys could refrain from comments/questions until all the notes are entered. I have a lot today. If I had the patience to sit in that courtroom today with that demon you surely can wait for my notes. Hand spanking hour over with now.

Oh I spoke with Harold when I got there who was nice as always. Also Tanisha who seems ok. Jake was saying how hard this must be for them and they all kind of shrugged. My sense is there is a sense of desensitization going on right now with them. A sophisiticated and good coping mechanism I think.


There is a strange echo in the courtroom right now. The sound is definitely different.

I've decided to not document all the questions as you heard/saw them and they will all be on here. So I focused more on the "color" going on in the courtroom.

She's so rehearsed now to answer without hearsay. She uses all the appropriate terms. I would say REHEARSED is the theme of the day.

Very few jurors taking notes .

She's coming across as confident.
"bedroom curriculum"??? WTH is that?

Blames everything on Travis..as usual.

She's totally rehearsed, anticipating these questions.

Paul Rudd is all dressed up today. He is in casual business attire and he usually wears sweats.

Men on the back row not buying it.

WTH is all this "edify" BS?

CEO tapping his hand on his notebook during the Leslie Udy story bs (he's seemed irritated all week..totally new with him)

Maureen taking notes.
Can see JA talking with her hands over the stand.

Males on the back have their heads cocked back..no one looks sympathetic, the opposite.

Way more animated today (JA)
Underwear special to her from a man she murdered who "attacked her".

Demon robot.

 

[ladonna]

Katiecool

Don't want to interrupt the flow of the thread, but desperate for an answer. At the end of the day when the jury left, did Jodie have a hizzy fit at the defense?

 

[MandyLeigh]

I am going to throw another question in here. I was watching the live feed. When both Martinez, Nurmi and Willmott was at the front there seemed to be some laughter going on and everyone was looking at the side of the room the Jury would sit. It happened more then once but the Jury was not there and the sound for my feed had been turned off.

It's not important so if there is a lot of questions to answer please don't worry about it, but just out of curiosity I was wondering what was funny. I enjoyed seeing everyone up there laughing.

ETA: (was posting this question so it would not get buried in o/t discussion as before so I was not aware of the hand slapping post. apologies)

 

[LotusPawprint]

Ok on to my notes...

There are some space issues so we have to move JM's friend up to the front row so I can't chat with him as much but I do at the first break or shall I say "issue with technical difficulties".

He's been a friend of JM for 20 years but hasn't been in this courtroom. He describes him as a "pit bull" and agrees that the real case will be tried in the rebuttal case. (he agrees with me I mean lol).

<snipped by LPP>

It's interesting that JM's friend is attending . From what we know about him and this case over the last 4&1/2 years, this has become as personal as it gets. I'm sure that's clear to his longtime friend and I'm so glad the family has such a dedicated, invested man working for justice.