Armchair Psych discussion of Jodi Arias

[Really?]

I would agree on that. Too much over the top does him a disservice.

yeah, it is rather chipper, smiley and cutesy cutesy between the DT and this witness.......makes me sick.

 

[shelley921]

You know, in a related vein, I've always felt like there was something entirely wrong about that "phone sex" tape. It felt, if you'll excuse the pun, "phoned-in" by Travis, almost as though he was reading from a script -- there seemed to be nothing in the way of actual sexual tension in the event. I cannot help but imagine the possibility that she actually asked him to say those specific things to her as part of fulfilling her fantasies as she had related them to him.

Others have made similar observations regarding the same possibility with the little girl pigtails, etc. These may indeed have been her requests. I make no claim for that being fact. I simply find it an entirely consistent possibility. She seems quite capable of manipulation at that level -- and oh, how convenient that sort of thing turned out to be when proposing a defense for Travis' death. :cow:

someone on dr drew last week or the week before mentioned that phone sex call and how it could have been scripted. how can we put anything past that evil witch jodi? i thought there was no sexual tension also. it just seemed totally lame and unerotic. but i don't think jodi is smart enough to have thought of using the phone sex taped call as a defense. she thought she was going to get away with the murder and would not be caught.

 

[SMK]

You know, in a related vein, I've always felt like there was something entirely wrong about that "phone sex" tape. It felt, if you'll excuse the pun, "phoned-in" by Travis, almost as though he was reading from a script -- there seemed to be nothing in the way of actual sexual tension in the event. I cannot help but imagine the possibility that she actually asked him to say those specific things to her as part of fulfilling her fantasies as she had related them to him.

Others have made similar observations regarding the same possibility with the little girl pigtails, etc. These may indeed have been her requests. I make no claim for that being fact. I simply find it an entirely consistent possibility. She seems quite capable of manipulation at that level -- and oh, how convenient that sort of thing turned out to be when proposing a defense for Travis' death. :cow:

Yes, many people have noticed this: Travis on the tape sounds pretty lukewarm for a man supposedly all reved up. Maybe at this late date he felt it was a way to pacify her, keep in her good graces, and as she was clear in California, what harm (he thought) could it do?

Yes, no doubt she had a double purpose with recording that call: On the one hand, it may have been a souvenir because at this point, she wasn't getting much else from Travis. On the other hand, it was handy for holding over his head and blackmailing him, and as we sadly see now, for character smearing of Travis in open court.

 

[ShadyLadySleuth]

How does everyone thin about Juan and tone he uses on cross? I think the heavy combat method used with psychologist should not been done on the battered women specialist. Think it would not bode well with jury.

Thanks for asking that question! I've been wanting to hear others views on that subject.

I, personally, have not appreciated his over-zealous tone with Dr. Samuels and feel he kept him on the witness stand too long on his cross. He spent too much time on sparring with the witness on petty issues.

If Juan uses the same tone and techniques on the battered women specialist, I think it will irritate the jurors who are probably exhaused by now and want this trial to be over.

 

[shelley921]

Thanks for asking that question! I've been wanting to hear others views on that subject.

I, personally, have not appreciated his over-zealous tone with Dr. Samuels and feel he kept him on the witness stand too long on his cross. He spent too much time on sparring with the witness on petty issues.

If Juan uses the same tone and techniques on the battered women specialist, I think it will irritate the jurors who are probably exhaused by now and want this trial to be over.

agree with this and hope he pulls it back and doesn't hammer her like he did samuels.

 

[Sleuth5]

How does everyone thin about Juan and tone he uses on cross? I think the heavy combat method used with psychologist should not been done on the battered women specialist. Think it would not bode well with jury.

Well, I suppose we'll know soon enough, but I'm suspecting it will be a bit different. I don't think he will withhold any of his rigorous attention to detail, but I suspect he will moderate his tone.

I think the primary difference will be the clear competence and standing of this expert vs. Dr. Samuels. She has the credentials and the experience to support the things she is saying -- but the difference here is that she has not shown any tendency to become personally involved with JA (even in a tangential way, having never even interviewed her.)

Because she will not be attempting to reconfigure her testimony at every challenge in order to bolster the defendant, I think JM will simply be able to point out that her diagnosis could apply more fittingly in this case to JA than to TA. In my opinion, he will be able to get her to admit that the behaviors she has indicated as typical of abusers are all attributable to JA rather than TA. The tone will be more professional and less combative simply because this is a legitimate expert who is able to speak with great authority on the subject -- and JM will simply be able to point out that she is applying her expertise to the wrong subject, or at least to get her to voice her opinion that alternate ways of viewing the situation are possible.

The big difference will be the level of combativeness. Samuels' reputation was a reasonable target for JM because of his insistence on advocating for the defendant rather than simply presenting a professional opinion. I don't think we will see anything like that with this expert, so JM will simply be able to have a professional discussion with the witness and make the points he needs to make without having to fence over every single detail as he did with Samuels. :cow:

 

[Ricochet]

The defense has her Axis II as personality disorder NOS (not otherwise specified). They are getting away with that and they darn well know she exhibits naracissism, borderlilne, antisocial and histrionic. These are the Cluster B's and she reeks with them. They are all severe in her case...which causes psychopathy.

It would seem to me pdnos would be a logical diagnosis. You can't say she has bpd (which she doesn't), npd, aspd etc if she doesn't have it. One or more traits of any personality disorder does not make a diagnosis. What it does means is she has traits of that disorder. So.. you can't discount one disorder (pdnos) for something like npd, aspd when she doesn't hold that diagnosis. Psychopathy is a part of pdnos, as is sadistic.

As far as Axis I, I doubt PTSD is the correct dx. She is complicated and would need testing such as the MMPI which they never gave.

I don't see how ptsd is that big of deal. It does seem to be a logica assessment of her, because it does create fogginess and memory loss. How we imagine something can be quite different the the effects of what is real. The crime she committed would have been a traumatic event. It really has nothing to do with anything, because it happened after the fact and not before. It would have played no role in premeditation.

I'll also disagree with the MMPI-2. (see below)

He would have to give her a MMPI.

I doubt there would be any real significant difference between the MMPI-2 and the MCMI.

I'm not making excuses for Jodi. A person with a personality disorder or not needs to accept responsibilty for their actions.

Based on Theodore Millon, Ph.D., D.Sc.’s Evolutionary Theory of personality and psychopathology, the brief Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III) instrument provides a measure of 24 personality disorders and clinical syndromes for adults undergoing psychological or psychiatric assessment or treatment. Specifically designed to help assess both Axis I and Axis II disorders, this psychological test assists clinicians in psychiatric diagnosis, developing a treatment approach that takes into account the patient’s personality style and coping behavior, and guiding treatment decisions based on the patient’s personality pattern.
The MCMI-III is composed of 175 true-false questions and usually takes the average person less than 30 minutes to complete. After the test is scored, it produces 29 scales — 24 personality and clinical scales, and 5 scales used to verify how the person approached and took the test.
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory, 3rd edition (MCMI-III) is an update of the MCMI-II which represents ongoing research, conceptual developments, and the changes in the DSM-IV. It is a standardized, self-report questionnaire assessing a wide range of information related to personality, emotionality, and test-taking attitude. Changes to the MCMI-II include addition of the Depressive and PTSD scales.
The Millon is often given in a clinical setting when questions arise about the specific diagnosis a person may have, or the personality traits or characteristics that the person has that may be impacting their ability to effectively cope with life or a mental health concern. It can readily illuminate personality traits and personality styles far more quickly and effectively than a clinical interview can for most clinicians.
Benefits of the Millon
The MCMI-III is distinguished from other personality tests primarily by its shortness, its theoretical anchoring, multiaxial format, tripartite construction and validation schema, use of base rate scores, and interpretive depth. It is anchored to Millon’s theories of personality and coordinated to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) personality disorders and other major clinical diagnoses.
A part of the MCMI-III is based upon Millon’s theory of personality, as illustrated in the following 15 personality styles and subtypes:
1. Retiring/Schizoid
2. Shy/Avoidant
3. Pessimistic/Melancholic
4. Cooperative/Dependent
5. Exuberant/Hypomanic
6. Sociable/Histrionic
7. Confident/Narcissistic
8. Nonconforming/Antisocial
9. Assertive/Sadistic
10. Conscientious/Compulsive
11. Skeptical/Negativistic
12. Aggrieved/Masochistic
13. Eccentric/Schizotypal
14. Capricious/Borderline
15. Suspicious/Paranoid
What the Millon Measures
There are 90 new items and 85 that remained the same maintaining the 175 total items of the MCMI-II. Most of the changes had to do with the severity of the symptoms to increase the ability to detect pathology. The test consists of 14 personality disorder scales and 10 clinical syndrome scales, each of which helps to determine whether the person may have a personality disorder, or a mental disorder such asdepression or anxiety.
The test is broken down into the following scales:
• Moderate Personality Disorder Scales
o 1. Schizoid
o 2A. Avoidant
o 2B. Depressive
o 3. Dependent
o 4. Histrionic
o 5. Narcissistic
o 6A. Antisocial
o 6B. Aggressive (Sadistic)
o 7. Compulsive
o 8A. Passive-Aggressive (Negativistic)
o 8B. Self-Defeating
• Severe Personality Pathology Scales
o S. Schizotypal
o C. Borderline
o P. Paranoid
• Moderate Clinical Syndrome Scales
o A. Anxiety
o H. Somatoform
o N. Bipolar: Manic
o D. Dysthymia
o B. Alcohol Dependence
o T. Drug Dependence
o R. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
• Severe Syndrome Scales
o SS. Thought Disorder
o CC. Major Depression
o PP. Delusional Disorder
There are also five scales used to help detect careless, confused or random responses on the test. There are three “Modifying Indices” that modify the person’s Base Rate scores based upon the following areas: Disclosure (X), Desirability (Y), Debasement (Z), and two random response indicators — Validity (V) and Inconsistency (W).
The test is brief in comparison to other personality inventories and it has a strong theoretical basis. Some psychologists prefer to give it because the administration and scoring are simple, and it has a multi-axial format. It is shorter than other personality tests, such as the MMPI-2 which has 567 true/false questions. It can be administered and scored on the computer in a psychologist’s office.
For the primary clinical and personality scales, Base Rate scores are calculated from how a person responds to the questions on the test. Scores of 75-84 are taken to indicate a significant personality trait or mental health concern. Scores 85 and higher indicate a persistent, significant clinical concern or personality disorder.
The psychometrics of the MCMI-III are good and it is considered a reliable and valid psychological test. The MCMI-III was normed with psychiatric patients and uses a new weighted score, the Base Rate Score (BRS) that takes into account the prevalence of the specific disorder in the psychiatric population. The normative data and transformation scores are based entirely on clinical samples and are applicable only to individuals who evidence problematic emotional and interpersonal symptoms or who are undergoing professionalpsychotherapy or a psychodiagnostic evaluation. The organization of the scales was confirmed by factor analysis and correlations done with third-party tests further confirm the validity of the scales. Internal consistency and alpha coefficients for the test, as well as test-retest reliability, are all good.
It was created by Theodore Millon, Ph.D., D.Sc., Roger Davis, Ph.D., Carrie Millon, Ph.D., & Seth Grossman, Psy.D.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I hope you are well and fit soon: I know Crohn's disease is very difficult to deal with. Best of luck to you!

I should not have set lil_buddy off as it does not seem right that everyone now has to give age and education history.

bbm ~ Thanks for taking credit for that (thought I was the one!).

Sometimes our, those of us who have them, health issues make us crabby. I'm an intestinal mess and it's very difficult to cope with at times.
From a psychological perspective, websleuths helps me get my mind off some of my own issues that, as hard as I've tried, can't find solutions. There has to be a psych study in there somewhere. :crazy: :sigh:

 

[Woe.be.gone]

um, I was merely pointing out that the trip to Cancun is not one of the places to visit before you die. I do not understand what the problem is with that???

TA said that he was going to out her on some kind of scam. I think he spelled it "scame".

I am wondering what the scam is.

Sorry. I misunderstood your point as you launched off my post. Nobody responded to whether or not JA was on the original booking to go to Cancun with TA, when she was taken off, etc. Two days ago that piece of info was on the news but I haven't heard much more about it. For instance, had she just found out she was no longer going and had been replaced or had she known that (that her trip was cancelled) weeks prior to June 4?

IMO, if she had just discovered TA's change of plans that no longer included her, that could be what set her off into a rage. The rage could have started back in California when she plotted. Regardless, she was going to show up and confront Travis face-to-face. Were the details of their communications right before June 4 discussed in detail on the stand? I'd like to hear the the prosecution present the minute details of their exchanges beginning two/three days before June 4. The general flavor stuff is one thing but I'd like them to map out how the scorn part developed and led to her premeditating killing TA. In other words, make it easy for me to picture the scenario. So far, the picture is too abstract. Make it micro, not macro. Does this make sense? I don't want them to rely on me to do that, I want them to do it for me - I'm a lazy juror with brain fuzz (not fog, fuzz!)

This has probably been discussed before but I wondered why the news came out with the concrete booking info only two days ago (that JA's name had actually been listed as the person going to Cancun with TA).

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Well, I suppose we'll know soon enough, but I'm suspecting it will be a bit different. I don't think he will withhold any of his rigorous attention to detail, but I suspect he will moderate his tone.

I think the primary difference will be the clear competence and standing of this expert vs. Dr. Samuels. She has the credentials and the experience to support the things she is saying -- but the difference here is that she has not shown any tendency to become personally involved with JA (even in a tangential way, having never even interviewed her.)

Because she will not be attempting to reconfigure her testimony at every challenge in order to bolster the defendant, I think JM will simply be able to point out that her diagnosis could apply more fittingly in this case to JA than to TA. In my opinion, he will be able to get her to admit that the behaviors she has indicated as typical of abusers are all attributable to JA rather than TA. The tone will be more professional and less combative simply because this is a legitimate expert who is able to speak with great authority on the subject -- and JM will simply be able to point out that she is applying her expertise to the wrong subject, or at least to get her to voice her opinion that alternate ways of viewing the situation are possible.

The big difference will be the level of combativeness. Samuels' reputation was a reasonable target for JM because of his insistence on advocating for the defendant rather than simply presenting a professional opinion. I don't think we will see anything like that with this expert, so JM will simply be able to have a professional discussion with the witness and make the points he needs to make without having to fence over every single detail as he did with Samuels. :cow:

Despite Samuel's mistakes, I found it offensive the way he was addressed on the stand. He's not the one on trial and readily admitted his mistakes. I would understand mistakes were made without someone trying to humiliate him on national TV. There's truth to the noise/tone getting in the way of communication. Some people end up hearing only the noise. When you've been around a yeller for awhile, you no longer hear their message.

What I really want to respond to is your pointing out that Alyce L.'s testimony may remain neutral and the defense may not attempt to have her personalize the information in defense of JA. That angle never dawned on me and I wondered how she was going to do that if she hadn't spent much time with her. I wasn't aware that AL hasn't even met with JA. Wow.

 

[SMK]

bbm ~ Thanks for taking credit for that (thought I was the one!).

Sometimes our, those of us who have them, health issues make us crabby. I'm an intestinal mess and it's very difficult to cope with at times.
From a psychological perspective, websleuths helps me get my mind off some of my own issues that, as hard as I've tried, can't find solutions. There has to be a psych study in there somewhere. :crazy: :sigh:

I'm in the same boat (not with same ailment, but with others which make me just as koo koo ):laugh::laugh:

 

[Equinoxical]

someone on dr drew last week or the week before mentioned that phone sex call and how it could have been scripted. how can we put anything past that evil witch jodi? i thought there was no sexual tension also. it just seemed totally lame and unerotic. but i don't think jodi is smart enough to have thought of using the phone sex taped call as a defense. she thought she was going to get away with the murder and would not be caught.

I don't think she recorded that call planning to use it in her defense, I think she recorded it to blackmail him into continuing a relationship with her.

And I think that Travis had plenty of experience "managing" crazy behavior (from his childhood) and a lot of what he did with JA was managing her and hoping she'd eventually go away. Poor guy.

JMO

 

[SMK]

Despite Samuel's mistakes, I found it offensive the way he was addressed on the stand. He's not the one on trial and readily admitted his mistakes. I would understand mistakes were made without someone trying to humiliate him on national TV. There's truth to the noise/tone getting in the way of communication. Some people end up hearing only the noise. When you've been around a yeller for awhile, you no longer hear their message.

I would agree. JM is similar to Jeff Ashton this way ( although the latter used less of a bulldog style, and more a sarcastic style) - but yeah, it winds up doing a disservice to the Prosecutor himself.

Sometimes if you are in the right, and address your opponent softly and politely, you get your facts across in a better way.

As you say, if you are too out there with your attacks, people might begin to feel sorry for the opposition.

I recall a trial where 2 of the defense witnesses were transvestites - males working as prostitutes, but dressed as females in their work. They weren't sympathetic characters. Yet the prosecutor was so rude, so sarcastic, so mean to them, that it made the jury sympathize with the defense (they said this later).

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I don't think she recorded that call planning to use it in her defense, I think she recorded it to blackmail him into continuing a relationship with her.

And I think that Travis had plenty of experience "managing" crazy behavior (from his childhood) and a lot of what he did with JA was managing her and hoping she'd eventually go away. Poor guy.

JMO

bbm ~ This is the kind of detail I'd like to hear expounded upon during the trial. I heard general questions asked such as "were there other phone tapes made?". I'm unclear if they were unable to find evidence of any other tapes (I know she said it was a relatively new phone of hers, TA didn't have the capability of taping on his phone, etc.) What date was the tape made? No traces of any others? Why would he still be participating in that behavior with her if he no longer wanted anything to do with her? Had she allegedly* slashed his tires yet? I haven't worked hard enough on this case to line up all accusations, evidence with dates, etc. to get a clear picture of facts.

We know he participated in pictures before June 4, so why not taped phone sex? No one can force the words we heard out of his mouth. These examples are what causes confusion as to what to believe for onlookers who never knew these two people personally.

*The jury can't use this info because it's only alleged.

 

[Tiger09]

I think the DT is shooting for dependent personality disorder and failing. The meek fake Jodi of the no makeup and bangs and glasses and "I didn't want to disappoint him so I participated in 50 Shades of Mormonism" is a show. An insulting show at that. Jodi Arias managed to slaughter a man in his prime, no he's not a holy angel, but who among us is? And she's managed to insult numerous amounts of people from abused women to homosexuals to George Clooney to random restaurants. She even threw Spider-Man under the bus. Spidey? Really? Now it's being reported that she's a puppy kicking mommy beater? I have to say maybe avoidance personality on her. But dude, not a victim. She'll fight and claw and manipulate till the end. She probably still does not think she did a thing wrong. Sad for Travis Alexander and his family.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I think the DT is shooting for dependent personality disorder and failing. The meek fake Jodi of the no makeup and bangs and glasses and "I didn't want to disappoint him so I participated in 50 Shades of Mormonism" is a show. An insulting show at that. Jodi Arias managed to slaughter a man in his prime, no he's not a holy angel, but who among us is? And she's managed to insult numerous amounts of people from abused women to homosexuals to George Clooney to random restaurants. She even threw Spider-Man under the bus. Spidey? Really? Now it's being reported that she's a puppy kicking mommy beater? I have to say maybe avoidance personality on her. But dude, not a victim. She'll fight and claw and manipulate till the end. She probably still does not think she did a thing wrong. Sad for Travis Alexander and his family.

All confusion to me. Because TA can't be perceived as 'perfect', JA will not get the death penalty imo. If she doesn't get a prison sentence, I'll fall over.

 

[SMK]

I think the DT is shooting for dependent personality disorder and failing. The meek fake Jodi of the no makeup and bangs and glasses and "I didn't want to disappoint him so I participated in 50 Shades of Mormonism" is a show. An insulting show at that. Jodi Arias managed to slaughter a man in his prime, no he's not a holy angel, but who among us is? And she's managed to insult numerous amounts of people from abused women to homosexuals to George Clooney to random restaurants. She even threw Spider-Man under the bus. Spidey? Really? Now it's being reported that she's a puppy kicking mommy beater? I have to say maybe avoidance personality on her. But dude, not a victim. She'll fight and claw and manipulate till the end. She probably still does not think she did a thing wrong. Sad for Travis Alexander and his family.

Absolutely: Self defense does not come across in any sense. Better to have argued a crime of passion and be done with it.

 

[SMK]

bbm ~ This is the kind of detail I'd like to hear expounded upon during the trial. I heard general questions asked such as "were there other phone tapes made?". I'm unclear if they were unable to find evidence of any other tapes (I know she said it was a relatively new phone of hers, TA didn't have the capability of taping on his phone, etc.) What date was the tape made? No traces of any others? Why would he still be participating in that behavior with her if he no longer wanted anything to do with her? Had she allegedly* slashed his tires yet? I haven't worked hard enough on this case to line up all accusations, evidence with dates, etc. to get a clear picture of facts.

We know he participated in pictures before June 4, so why not taped phone sex? No one can force the words we heard out of his mouth. These examples are what causes confusion as to what to believe for onlookers who never knew these two people personally.

*The jury can't use this info because it's only alleged.

I can't seem to find the date of this phonecall, but I vaguely recall it was in April , perhaps 2 months before the murder. But now I can't recall where I heard that. :crazy:

 

[shelley921]

bbm ~ This is the kind of detail I'd like to hear expounded upon during the trial. I heard general questions asked such as "were there other phone tapes made?". I'm unclear if they were unable to find evidence of any other tapes (I know she said it was a relatively new phone of hers, TA didn't have the capability of taping on his phone, etc.) What date was the tape made? No traces of any others? Why would he still be participating in that behavior with her if he no longer wanted anything to do with her? Had she allegedly* slashed his tires yet? I haven't worked hard enough on this case to line up all accusations, evidence with dates, etc. to get a clear picture of facts.

this is confusing to me too. but i think YES she had slashed the tires and been caught peeping into windows etc. BEFORE this particular phone sex call. didn't she do all that stuff before she departed from AZ in April of 2008? and this phone sex call was late May of 2008-right?

 

[Sleuth5]

Absolutely: Self defense does not come across in any sense. Better to have argued a crime of passion and be done with it.

Yes, but when you have a client who is unwilling to acknowledge any failing and unshakably convinced that she was justified in killing, you could never even broach the possibility of such a defense.

I think her initial determination to defend herself was largely a consequence of wise counsel insisting that she admit to what seemed so apparently obvious from the evidence. She was wholly unwilling to acknowledge that there might be even the least little thing awry with her personality, being that she now imagines herself a sort of Bodhisattva come to reveal great mystical truths to us all. :cow: