*graphic and adult content* Jodi Arias Trial media/ timeline thread **no discussion**

[SyraKelly]

A big Thank you to Mrs.Wilco-you rock!!!

 

[wenwe4]

Judge Stevens @ bench . . .Atty's are present as is JA . . . jurors are not present.

approach the bench

Nurmi, Wilmot, Martinez all @ bench . . . defense Atty's have papers with green notes attached (evidence or ready to be entered evidence?)

Another Man @ bench (some other Atty?)

Stevens announces we will be taking things out of order . . . Ms Wong will you please come forward . . up to the bench to be sworn

Wong takes a seat in witness chair

Grace Wong - employed by Turner Broadcasting . .
Nurmi asks to approach - 4th Atty also @ bench

 

[wenwe4]

Judge asks Nurmi to try again to see if still getting feedback.

Grace Wong - Turner Broadcasting -
began coverage since Jury selection - sitting in the gallery nearly daily. . . .
are you familiar with the jurors - facial recognition
from the ones I can see.

Juror 1, 2, 3, 4,5, 9, 18, 17 . . . most of the jurors - if you give me a test to match - I think I know them . . .I know them by face but now havin to recall their numbers.

Can't see Juror #10 and Juror #1 not exactly sure.

Marked as exhibit #2 - package produced by one of CNN affiliate stations - prosecutor being treated as a celebrity. . . reviwed recently with wong's Atty. . . . gw was seen in this video - observe this behavior on part of JM?
yes
take photos with public, autograph,
yes

 

[wenwe4]

I missed last few questions of Ms. Wong (sorry)
next witness would like to stand and operate something while testifying. . . . camera has panned over to the jury box . . .

JA and JW in front row of jury box

Travis' brother and sisters sitting in the back row of jury box.

video presented by Mr. Neumeister - photo exhibit #159 . . .TA staring straight into the camera.

Nurmi asks about . . . work, background. . . simple explanation of work you did? . .
court reporter having trouble hearing - given a portable microphone.

JA and JW appear to be passing notes . . . .

Witness has been working professionally with cameras since 1980 - video enhancement and enlargements . . .his Dad was executive @ ? . .. he grew up around ?

witness will take seat in witness stand - Mr. Neumeister - education and training - video enhancement and enlargement

his Dad Nat. Broadcasting . . . trainee working with engineers, cameras he worked with in 1970 were Lyca an high end cameras . .. .professional video cameras for KPNX tv in Phoenix. . . magazines like AZ highways who wanted images cropped - this was before digital . . . cropping negatives

digital work still coming in . . . 5 years ago started making dent in the film market.

digital photo - enhancing digital photos . . . worked as a Beta distributer? . . . components made for forensic work . . . I've worked with photoshop since the beginning - fairly straightforward. . . photoshop good for doing portraits and family work but it's not.

objection - please approach

 

[wenwe4]

Both sisters are cryin .. .

2 min recess - we will make some adjustments (I must have missed something . .. )

JAand her Atty have moved closer to the vdeo source.

 

[wenwe4]

Witness . . . . saying not a bad camera - shoots low end video . . .

when look @ lens & camera . . . enhancement

straight lines on the end . . . .curve

shoot a chip chart

lines on 50 mm lens all the lines would be horizontal and vertical

fish eye - bowing effect - gives you a fisheye effect - usually happens on the edges . .. where lines are not straight.

reflections seen in photos . .. is it common to have a reflection?
can be

cornea - how do you account in the curvature -
2 things to take into account . . .

shooting into . . . shot product shots . . . picture of sunglasses . . you will have a picture of the photographer or

when you have an eye . .. exact shape of the cornea and is the lens recto-linear? (straight lines or fisheye curve)

tears . . . . cover up the cornea

lens is wide . . 1.25 format chip - 8 megabites. . . I had enough pixel data to get whatwas reflectd in the eye. . .

I went from 8 bit format in that camera - to 16 bit to prevent color stair stepping - smoother . . .

meta data came from the exemplar on the screen . . on every camera you have meta-data . . shutter speed, date, iso-light speed, max. apiture, pixel size, flash, and ? level and date of photo if camera clock was set correctly.

admit exhibit 1 . .
admitted for purpose of this hearing only

work done in this case - reflection able to obtain from TA's cornea . .

correct

why were you .. .. able to retain a refelction from his eyeball.

how many pixels per inch ppi . .. person holding camera was holding camera low - the white shwer enclosure - got a bounce and lite up person taking the picture.


a mapping of his eye - would have to take camera and map the lens . . .within a few feet but not how many inches

few feet determined how?
Boca is distortion in background not a lot in this in the depth of field so person in focus but background is blurry.

this was shot w/16 mm and get a full face like tht you would have to be fairly close

look @ exhibit #2
photo - enlargement @ stock 72tpi of the eye . . increased bit depth to 16 . . .

16 bit into the trillions of colors - prevents from red going to pink being choppy

TA left eye - move to admit exhibit #2
admitted for purpose of this hearing only

 

[wenwe4]

TA's left eye . . tell us what we see . . . enhanced to 72 dpi stock from the camera - has to do with printer . . .output format

based on this what can we see? any conclusions from this?

reflection from the cornea - interesting if not in the mid of the pupil - would not get this photo . . . camera being fired from this position . . choratic ?

fairly low . . . can you recognize person taking photo? no there is not enough pixels per inch . . . but someone taking a picture about chest high . . . don't know the height of TA and don't know height of TA so purely speculative.

same image only it has been taken up to 2280 dpi - easier to work with. . .

in clear id . . .on digital camera - notice one white dot - dead pixel . . . go thru and see if there are any bad pixels to blow it up . . . went thru each channel . . . didn't find any dead pixels -

exhibit #3 - admitted for this hearing only

resolution of the monitor . . . in his lab it is 2x the resolution . . .
up resed to 2880 dpi - no bad pixels . . .more latitude working pixel by pixel . . .

someone has a mole could be a dot on their face - from bad pixel - make sure no dead pixels . . didn't look @ entire picture - just part of pupil area. . .

based on this do you begin to see more in this picture?
yes but I was able to trace what I could see in the lab - I did rough outline what I could see in the lab.

then in that outline . . . exhibit #4 purposes of this hearing
same photo with outlines referred to.move to admit #4
admitted for this hearing

witness steps down an changes picture again . . JA looks on and whispers to her Atty

Image on screen looks to be a human figure on his equipment . . .person holding a camera . . . this outline . . . only thing changed was the brightness (light level) . . .

black values drop out first - in order to trace more clearly - he enhanced the brightness -nothing fancy.

too much light on the subject - white values tend to bloom - blown out face and hair

2880 dpi . . . further enhancement make to photo?
cleaner but very good chance I could creating an image vs. enhancing.

if I go any further . . . . I went up to 7000 dpi - didn't see advantage
I did pixel stacking - yes I could see a little more but I don't think it would be good evidence.

 

[wenwe4]

When last time you testified in this case?
earlier on - I enhanced audio in this case

part of reason you testified in audio so you could be qualified to testify in audio?
ever testified in any court as to the work you have done in this case previously?
isn't it true motivation for you testifying in the audio - so you qualify as audio?
I have testified numerous times in audio - answer no

objections - counsel approach

 

[wenwe4]

last time you testified audio case?
I have 29 cases . . . just retained by your office again . . . a few months ago - don't know name . .

name of the judge?
I would have to look @ my notes
did you testify for prosecutor or defense
prosecutor
name?
eric . . .

previous time you testified . . .I have been in evidentury hearings . .
before a jury

enhancement and audio what other areas you testified to
video
enhancement videos - survellience video

I help . . have equipment the police dept doesn't have . . . use photos that are cleaner . . . you have testified as an expert . . . . audio, video, pictures

city of Mesa. . . representing Mesa PD . . . shooting
what kind of expertise?
enhanced audio from officer's mic's - background sounds

enhanced TA's left eye?
enlarged it
drew some lines - exhibit #4 - these are lines that you drew
your eyes with corrective lenses are ?
20/20

you see better than anyone else with 20/20 vision?
no
if you were to present this you would have exhibit #3 available
true but it would be better look @ HD . . .

what is dbi marking on the front?
look @ it with no markings on . . . people might disagree with you from these markings on here?
sure
there is not scientific test . . .
what we could do is I could put up. . .
no is there a test like a cancer test . .

yes magnetic lasseu? and chromatic . . . with equipment I have - yes

JM says I don't see it
you are not looking thru it on my equipment
if you were looking @ that on monitor

If I looked @ it and didn't see it - you have no way to prove it
that would be up to the jury
nothing more

 

[wenwe4]

JM argues 10 people would see 10 different things . . . no way to verify what someone sees is correct . . . . no way to test rate of error. . . whether someone sees a gopher or a dog . . .what are the standards or controls he uses . . where we could look @ those and replicate it . .. like a blood test where it can be verified.

this is a subjective test . . . no testimony this approach has been accepted in scientific community . . .voodoo . . .

when we put it up . .. I thought it was a dog 2 ears, eyes, nose and a stick (in its mouth)

if the jury . . . .

this winess talking about daubert but he is not a lawyer and he doesn't know what he is talking about

Nurmi - in this trial we have seen hundreds of texts . . . JM is the same person who told us that texts didn't exist . . . says he sees a dog so everyone should see it.

this is science- JM takes a limited view of science . . . . misguided and altered view of what is now science or not science . . . this evidence is prohibitive for the State's position . . .

Neumeister testified he used commonly used clear id software . . . JM evaded that reality. no dispute challenging what he did . . there was personal character assassination . . .

Mr. Martinez is afraid of the bite in this dog I guess

2 alternatives
court can preclude this picture without this trace and have the jurors go to his lab . . . validity and see this outline . . . Nurmi has seen it - been to the lab - this is merely a trace . . .scientific results enlargement of the video. . . . outline is merely something they cannot see because limits of this courtroom.

JA is entitled full defense. . . .
either bring jury up to his lab or allow all 4 photos in

Judge Mr. Nurmi . . .
under rule #702 A - knowledge of expert - will help trier of evidence - fact?

Nurmi - turn court back to 159 - series of photos - JA was taking a picture of TA exactly how she said she did.

Mr. Neumeister work shows . . her hands both on the camera and she is few feet away . . . no knife in her hands - no just a camera - just a few feet away - helps jury understand testimony . . . attacked JA's credibility . .. assists the trier of fact

object JM - don't see camera, knife, I saw dog - don't know german shepard or Chihuahua . . .

I will hear comments .. (judge)
for the record Nurmi was just handed this morning state's motion (fo mistrial)Mr. Martinez intimidate witnesses. . .

interview JM conducted with Mr. Samuels . . .

doesn't have anything to do with juror saw me take photo or signing auto - (JM)
first motion or 2nd - we can do.

Judge Mr. Nurmi -

ineffect. assistance of counsel - JM engaged in behavior imitated by those following trial - to harass and intimidate witness . . . . this is relevant to JM intimidate Mr.Samuels just as he did with ALV in chambers.

JM wants info from Ms. Wong before moving foreward

Nurmi - motion for mistrial - prosecutorial misconduct is cumulative issues . . . State mentions in their motion - numerous motions for mistrial - he has thrown stuff, yelled @ witnesses, he chose to walk outside - sign autographs and pose for pictures. . . this was not viewed by any other juror but the previous conduct was.

he is standing out there having a fan club - put aside the unprofessionalism of that - this sort of behavior is exciting a mistrial in this case . . . he is the great one . . . it is infusing trial . . .. every other action including avows seeing dogs and text messages don't exist -one big continuum throughout this trial - continued .

JM says isolated incident - reporter ask he walk outside an pose for pictures . . . somehow the defense wants to connect that with what the social media does - doesn't show a connected or nexus to the prosecutor - something unscripted and nothing affected the jurors . ..
talked to jurors - but defense ontinues to grandstand . . . Ms. Wong saw nothing . . even if she had the jurors saw nothing - we waste court time . . . .wasting time is an ethical issue . . .how this started they indicated that Jurors saw Mr. Martinez . . . wasting everyone time is problematic . . . except fordefense counsel to see if they can add a few more pennies . . . .

objection to comments made
I am sorry for

court considered #1 & 2 . . Ms. Wong and Cesares . . . juror question . . .

law provides to prove pros. misconduct must show actions were improper
reasonable likelihood deny defendant fair trial

there is no proof jury saw in front of court house
Denied

 

[wenwe4]

audio playing between Dr.Samuels and JM ... .in December JA was feeling down/depressed . . . some of the pictures had come out . . . .don't remember spending a lot of time with her didn't find her as depressed as he thought she would be . . .

expressive vs. ? .. .

never used these 2 newwords . . . when did you begin to testify?
couple months ago
that is when these words popped up
2-4 months ago

why did you start talking about this - not mention instrumental and expressive
I came to that conclusion - I came up with this research . . .

premediated murder -
explains why not a premeditated murder
these terms instrumental . ..
in the literature
why not use then into your report
only a certain amount of time to do your report -you do more further research after report

premeditated . . .
instrumental vs. expressive

instrumental talks about what research has said is premeditated
expressive is not pre-meditted murder
part ofit yes - part of personality

different types of crime research goes into pre-meditated or not
disociattive amnesia . . .vs. PTSD
related to inability to recall details of the crime

dissociative amnesia caused by psychogenic factors - 50% people who commit crimes experience amnesia - cant remember details of the trauma in PTSD

result of testing or talking to her reached this based on what?
PTSD from testing . . . PTSD stress scale
and compared her symptomology from th DSm

related to PTSD . . . stressed hippocampus
it will shut down during stress - happened when she did the crime -charactheristics of the crime scene and what she told me

need statement from DSM-4 TR - up there - to explain
I didn't prepare a slide
what makes this any different you could also describe that without resorting to articles
for th jury
but you could explain it to them
yes

this time magazine article 1/13/2013 - new . . .
it is presented as anecdotal . . . fairly common phenomenon . . . going to explain physiological changes in brain under stress and why memory not formed during this

under extreme stress this is what happen . . you don't need time magazine do you
I understand but also know use to explain story to jury

what so difficult explain story about a cop
we live in 21st century and have these methods and when teaching students or explain
even a blind person can run the bases? . . . ????
blind people cannot see his
who brought it up me or you
what does a blind person have to do this

do you have md cross section of thebrain
you are familiar with it - training and experiencing
I use that diagram whenever

you have a lot of training of the brain . . have lectured . . .you could explain it
a picture is worth a thousand words
can you explain
I can

 

[wenwe4]

Nurmi saying JM's sideshow out front of the courthouse . . . JM bully Dr. Samuels about the way he wishes to present evidence . . . leaning forward and saying you could present this and that . throughout entire tape what he can or how he can present evidence.

then he talks about how he cares about the . . . occur before Dr. Samuels testified. . . all other things off the record in sealed proceedings about Dr. Samuels . .. . intimidation . . not talking in a vacuum . . . I wouldn't be here grabbing my pennies. . . . fact that we are 4 months into a trial is giving JM to do what he wants . . . he bullied Dr. Samuels and ALV . .

all grounds for prosecutorial misconduct all for mistrial

State inappropriate questioning of ALV . .. Judge knows the truth - disheartening to have him say that while you were present -
if there is something that she is upset about that ....

Dr. Samuels need to step back . . . the defense counsel on the eve of Samuels testimony had a power point . . . had state not walk by wouldn't have had a chance to view it . . . can't look @ it and keep pointing fingers @ prosecutor . .. look @ what JM did. . .during the lunch period JM spoke to . . .thank God there was an audio between prosecutor Mr. Samuels . . . comment about blind people JM didn't bring up but Samuels did - he was being evasive . . you can hear tone of voice - defense counsel raising voice higher than prosecutor - do a test to see . .. .

we could have a solar eclipse today but notproven . . . Dr. Samuels . . .his failure . . he quite frankly relied on a lie and he got caught on it . ..
motion raise issue . . . .how media covers this case - State has no control over that . . . defense keeps attributing to the State

the defendant has been tweeting thru a female acquaintance of hers . . .things going out . . flames being fanned y defendant herself. I ask the court issue an order she desist from that . . . again disparaging comments made . . . I don't watch tv on this trial . .. how tall the prosecutor is . . . .what the defendant is doing . . constant attack on the prosecutor what media and people chose to believe State has no control - but the defendant has ability and ask she stop it.

Now Nurmi up

 

[wenwe4]

change game, change ball, . . . .change what happened

JM didn't address questions but says defendant has a twitter account - so there.

behavior outside of the courtroom . . in terms of shell game . . .

JW asked JM to look @ it before Samuels went on the stand - he had a chance - referring to Dr. Samuels to Mr. Samuels . . .he has a PhD a diploma stooping to levels the defense will not stoop.

it doesn' change game . . not talking bout blind people or dogs, twitter account . . .whos twitter account? . . . I am glad court was there . . .knows the extent of violation he has extended to ALV and Dr. Samuels. . .

pointing finger other way doesn't absolve

Judge says fine line between . . . a
both occurred outside presence of the jury - court has no information it affected their testimony . . .court doesn't find any error because of these events . . .

court finds prosecutor wasnot in any way of outside the bounds o proper behavior during in chamber discussion wth ALV . ..

interview court finds nobasis affect testimony in any way of dr samuels

defendant tweeting from jail

Nurmi put forth a course of action to see if she is violating any rules . . . she has freedom of speech rights. . . . if he wants her to decease a particular behavior come forth with some evidence . . . .

our office has discussed but we do not want to be accused of prosecutorial misconduct . . . state is again put in position where State is accused of . . . .

I think the name is Donovan (dovana) . . . other than viewed the media . .

court is not going to take any action if she is tweeting from jail - she is in sheriff custody - that is up to them . . . if need be we can take up

Nurmi asks to approach the bench ex-parte for a moment

 

[wenwe4]

recess until 1:15

 

[TigerBalm]

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 47 - Misconduct/Evidentairy Hearing - Part 1

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 47 - Misconduct/Evidentairy Hearing - Part 2

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 47 - Stipulation Entered - Court Resumes Tomorrow

 

[TigerBalm]

Jodi Arias Trial Day 47 Part 1 [No Sidebars]

Jodi Arias Trial Day 47 Part 2 Of 2 [No Sidebars]

 

[wenwe4]

Janeane Demarte =clinical psychologist = U of Mass . . Psychology - undergrad 2002. then onto Michigan State U - 2003 working in 2 research labs- children - conducted psychological testing with kids approx. 50 of them . . .worked with data, psychologist, & grad students . . . also another lab.

Michigan State - Masters 2005 and Doctorate 2009
completed studies in 2008 and then 1 yr residency to complete doctorate - worked @ hospital . . . provided treatment and evaluation of patients deemed not guilty of crime due to insanity . . treatment try to alleviate symptoms and help them be more functional.

conducted about 15 patient evaluations. .. . sh could chose to get license in 2010 . .became director of large Behavioral Health facility - supervised staff - primary goal - Master level Counselor & Social worker, doctorate candidates supervision - training program - 30 students Masters & Doctoral level - taught them do testing evals write reports . . . .

dr. Ceilise Kersten - (?) was working toward Doctorate. . . .
masters degree do not typical do evals so trained them in therapy/treatment

ALV has a Masters degree -same as someone this witness would supervise

age range 2-99 therapy and evaluation @ Arizona behavioral health

treatment for . . ..
primary role was director - pimar y lead on all evals done by doctoral students

few own patients herself and

children in system - multiple diagnosis - evals to determine what going on with them

she has done work in this county and Pinella county

Psych eval - comprehensive assessment to determine what is a person's diagnostic picture.

how is treatment different than eval?
important part of therpy you develop close relationship . . . evaluator doesn't .. . they are unbiased 3rd party as evaluator.

2 different roles . . . . she doesn't eval on the patients that does therapy with .. . .do not go in with hypothesis . . . .

forensic eval- some records first - read &review - indicators in there certain diagnosis vs. others. . ..
part of education . . . psychologist have a special power to go behind the words . . .

use those records as face value - objective data . . . .

what I mean is I look @ and give it to someone else they see exact same thing.

Exhibit #156 -journal entry Jan 24 - haven't written because there has been noteworthy to report.

is the kind of thing you do to think
she reads it and takes it @ face value . . . nothing noteworthy to report

would you chane this wording to say they wrote that but word nothing doesn't man nothing -does psychologist have special abiliy to go behind what is writtendown -trust me and disregard what it says here.
ojection- sustained

a psychotherapist with a Masters to go behind what it says
no and I am very familiar with the curriculum.

course taught Law of Attraction as a psychology degree?
no -not as way it is used in the secret . . . . my knowledge is limited - putting out positivity.

is Secret part of private reading or came across as part of your psychology degree or resideny
I am aware of it - it came up as a barrier to treatment in many patients who were reading it or watch video.
bad things happen in life . . . . not just positive

materials provided by JA . . . as part of this eval process.. .. what is next step?
schedule to go see this person
is there a mandate to see someone 44 hours
no that's extreme . . . never heard of someone making clinical interview is even more extreme. . . usually clinical interview about an hour. . . .foresic one can take a little longer.
@ 44 hours . . .it becomes more therapeutic . . . or my students who didn't know what they were doing and took a really long time .. . not good @ assessments

I didn't apologize to JA .. . it seems odd to apologize . . . .seems like evaluator is sayig they feel bad . . . not appropriate for evaluator.

Psychologists often do not take on objective evaluator . . . .have trouble
you shouldn't feel that compassion - it would bias your results. . . if you feel bad fo them you want to help them .. . results will not be accurate.

How many hours clinical interview in this case?
12 hours is high.

I did additional testing in addition.

done with 12 hours and testing was done - did you go back an see her 12 mo later?
no I would never do that

objection - approach

 

[wenwe4]

Is there any need for forensic interviewer to go back?
if I had received new data and I was uncertain about opinion
no ethical reasons I can think of

ever provide gifts for person you evaluate??
no that is inappropriate - independent evaluator - multiple roles in evalution . . . .

Dr. Samuels gave book Your Erroneous Zones . . .
she is not familiar with it - she has never provided self-help book - concerned about multiple role confusion . . ..if they read the book that could potentially learn something or act certain way. skew actual objective results of the testing you want as part of the eval.

JA's psych hix, social hx, educational hx, sexual experience history, . . . .conducting testing . . .written communication or records - another piece of data - another objective viewpoint.

can people who work with you give tests to others?
very limited what they can do.. psychometrist can give the test but not able to determine the results.

is the Dr. Samuels report the only other report you had
no- I had
objection - approach

 

[wenwe4]

Did you receive report/dcs from Cheryl ? . . . .and test data . . . did it contain a diagnosis?
yes
this diagnoss she had something youconsidered in this case
Cheryl carp - psychologist - administered tests - clinical interview . . . . her diagnosis was also that of PTSD . .. correct - triggering eventof the PTSD from Cheryl Carp? . . . Dr Carp said she developed PTSD from the details of her abusive relationship . . . abuse detailed in Dr.Carp report and other documents . . . very different

she reportedto Dr. Carp significantly more abuse than to demarte or to Dr. samulels or ALV . . .
how many incidents of phys. abuse did she tell you? . .. 4 . . .. to Samuels? . . 4 . . . .ALV - 4 . . .Cheryl Carp - how many events did JA indicate toher? . . . can' even count - significantly more to Carp than to witness.

form of document or interview?
part testing
believe it is called partnr/abuse scale --need to review records

Dr. Carp concluded JA had PTSD as part of all of the events in this abusive relationship - not just one event.

Demarte did testing . . . related to Cheryl Carp gave . . . . Trauma Syndrome Inventory (TSI) . . . self report- 100 questions . . .general emotional distress - exposed to some sort of trauma . . . do you have nightmares or intrusive thughts?
DeMarte administered this test twice . . . .. back to back . .. didn't go back another time . . . .on the test . ... follow the protocol Dr. Carp did last 6month . . . .and again one

all 3 tests (2 Demarte and 1 Carp) were similar in (score?)

#620 - she reviews is - previous 6 mon - while in jail . . . exhibit . . . experiencing depression, anxiety, a varity of sympoms . .. nothing different than she being in jail . . .

JD (demarte) wanted her to reflect back in Jan before TA died -he started making remarks she didn'tlike . . . .TSI for Jan 2007 .. . . similar results -except she was havig sexulconcers. . anxity deptression, nightmares intrusive thought,

relatively same as the one for Jan 2007 (reflected) and the one within th last 6 mo.

Trauma Symptom Inventory . . .

Mr. Samuels . . . objection - he is Dr.
allright Ms. Demarte
objection
Did he administer PDS?
Post Tramatic Stress diagositic . . . . raw data - essentially a bubble sheet . . . Samuels gave - typically the answer sheet - person being evaluated . . .they fill it out themselves

when you give this test do you provide the bubble sheet . .. . is MMPI also a bubble type test? yes . . . do you write that down on a legal pad . . . or give them a bubble sheet . . .why not just ask them and write it down?
not protocol - human errorcould be involved. . .. bubble sheet was filed out by whom?. . . I was under the impression Ms. Arias did. . . . unless there was an extreme reason for that to occur.

can't think of extreme reason ok for that.
bubble sheet wasn't scored - just raw data . . . a

bubble sheet . . . .compare with bubble sheet . . .triggering mechanism w/PTSD ...an event that occurred with a stranger . . . not a stranger - it was TA . . . . .it would invalidate it .. . . PTSD is the only diagnosis we can explain the exact etiology . . . . .the specific trauma . . .nightmares aou the car wreck.

PTSD . .. . from an event occurred with a stranger .. . . invalidates test if not specific event.

if she says she still has trauma . . . but not related to a stranger . . . . invalidates the test

does this validate
No because it is just another thing Ms. Aras chose to lie about

Objection JUDGE . . . JW stomps . . . approaching

 

[wenwe4]

Disregard last witness answer . . . Judge admonishes witness . . .answer only question asked.

PDS has subsequently changed since . . .. .other change since what caused his trauma . . valid for PTSD?
it is not valid . . . the questions on the test asks person to go back to the specific event . . . I have nightmares from this trauma . . . scored on that event.

exhibt #550 . . number of symptoms is 17 . . . and we will look @ exhibit #535 symptoms number is two different results . . . .in your practice is there a reason tokeep going back to score? . . . hypothesis you keep going back and score it 3 times?
no
any necessity to score something 3 times. . . .
only reason would be if they were not scored correct first time or manipulate the data.

exhibit #541 by Dr. Samuels?
yes
look @ bottom - talksaout ptsd - 10, 69 and 69

unadjusted base rate score . . . . we usally go off final base rate score . . .look @ final base rate score -PTSD = 69

base rate scores - symptom endorsement symptom presentation.

there has to be a threshold - it is meaningful - if not it is not clinically relevant.

yes but because I have practiced for 35 years I will ignore it . . .thresh hold set by research . . . if after 75 it becomes significant. . ..

elevated score between 75 and 85 . . . .mean they have PTSD - no just one data point for th full eval.

Milan . . . done by a computer . . . can you tell it was scored manually or compter?
manual - hand written
done by computer -need togo back and score this thing?
no
any reason to rescore if done by computer .. . only if error was made or data manipulated.
objection judge - maywe approach?