Interim discussion regarding questions from the jury and Arias on the stand #81

[A_News_Junkie]

I meant shoeprint, not footprint, sorry.

Here is the shoe print I am referencing.

Here is the schematic shown in court re: 'shoe impression'

 

[Schuby]

I think Travis called her a , right?

I am totally... bias and I will admit that this is total projection, but it sounds like they were suggesting that she fit the definition. I know, I know.. I am sure there is a perfectly legit reason, other than that, for the juror asking the question. I just don't know what else it could be. :waitasec:

(skngk)
n.
1. A rhythmic dance performed to reggae or ska music, characterized by bending forward, raising the knees, and extending the hands.
2. Disgusting or vulgar matter; filth.
3. One who is disgustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl.
intr.v. skanked, ·ing, skanks
To dance the .

I am thinking that we can rule number 1 out.

That was totally what the "question" was saying.

 

[LambChop]

If anyone lost their job, the employer would be in big trouble. I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to terminate someone because of jury duty.

These short weeks don't help ether. Only 2 days this week. They really should be in court on Friday to move it along. IMO

ETA: Most employers pay employees their regular salary while on jury duty.

Years ago we were told if there is no court then we had to return to work. I would guess many of those jurors put in a full day on Fridays. jmo

 

[Mykeru]

I'd like to personally thank you for utilizing Google!!! There are way too many posts that are simply "What's a lovesac" or "How far is it from A to B" etc.

So, thank you!

Pfft. Everyone knows "Lovesac" is a song by the B-52s.

Morons!

 

[ndrew]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=z4U6fAeIpTo

this is the full tape from dr drew, ts so nice to hear him taking beside that court tape - but it still makes me so sad

I think that is Dan Freeman sitting next to jodi on the left. Did anyone else notice?

 

[LambChop]

I listened to the beginning of the trial, missed it, where Juan played Det. Flores' interrogation tapes. Jodi in her lie story about the man and woman, letting her live--blah, blah---said the man picked up her jeans and took out $100 in cash from the pockets? Rifled through her wallet, for her address, of course.
Might Jodi picked up Travis' jeans and took cash from his pocket...rifled through his wallet?

I believe Jodi's statement was that she had put money in the pocket of her jeans in her backpack so the man did not find that. He only went through her wallet. jmo

 

[Southern_Meadow]

What more needs to come? She’s guilty. She admits she killed him and by killed him I mean she admits she over killed him. And I believe she should be sentenced accordingly but to make a grandstand death penalty case out of this obsessive woman scorned case just turned the whole thing into a giant circus.

JA turned this into a circus the day she took the stand. Even defense attorneys are saying it's absurd for her to have been on the stand this long. JM is seeking justice for Travis and has to play JA's game to get the job done. Would you rather he sit at his table like an imbecile and allow her and KN to run said circus?

As far as being overcharged.... I don't see that at all. If this woman doesn't deserve murder one, then just abolish the whole thing.

 

[G&AMom]

Oh well. Maybe Nurmi will realize that the less they say the better. Maybe then we can have good news for Easter. lease:

I don't think there is a prayer of that happening! :floorlaugh:

My take on Nurmi is that he has a story he wants to tell. He tells it at excruciating length. You (the jurors) don't seem to get it. He tells it again, with more detail. You roll your eyes -- clearly you just don't understand. So he tells the story YET AGAIN, repeating everything all over again, with more details (& more lies from Jodi).

It's like he's just going to keep hammering until you "understand." He has no Plan B, not even a way to tell the story in a different way. That's why, IMHO, he's just not a good lawyer.

 

[thefragile7393]

I have looked and can't find yet, a picture of the bedroom/closet/bathroom layout that had a arrow pointing to a bloody footprint in the bathroom and the words (foot print) were in a circle in the closet. hope that made sense.

I remember seeing one in the video to BC......it was outlined briefly.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[perfectvirgo]

What more needs to come? She’s guilty. She admits she killed him and by killed him I mean she admits she over killed him. And I believe she should be sentenced accordingly but to make a grandstand death penalty case out of this obsessive woman scorned case just turned the whole thing into a giant circus.

bbm No, she claims she was defending herself. From the evidence it manifestly appears not to be self-defence. I see no circus. I see due legal process with a small public gallery. Media interest reflects public outrage.

 

[TartLemon]

I honestly don't believe Jodi thought this was gonna last so long or be so brutal. Nurmi is experienced enough to know. He also tries to get her to shut up a few times, but as usual Jodi knows best.

Nurmi's taking a lot of heat for his horror of a client.

 

[G&AMom]

(respectfully snipped)

The defense has been screaming for a MISTRIAL since January 1st---I think Juan has saved his "surprises" for the end--just in case that, for some crazy reason (the Chinese Water Torture of Nurmi?)--someone flips out in open court.

Saving the big guns for the rebuttal keeps his strategy from the defense until the last possible moment--IMO

I think he saves his suprises, as well. For one thing, it lets JA dig herself in really deep. She can't say she "misspoke" or something if she's repeated it ten times. Plus, that business about the gas cans really rattled her on Thursday. He sets her up where she thinks she's got everything under control and then, BOOM!

I know there's a difference of opinion on how intelligent Jodi is, but she was smart enough to admit she was over her head when she tried to act as her own attorney. I think she's getting another lesson that she isn't as smart as she thought she was.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I'm going to be a total mess when the verdict is read.
How many days do you guys think the trial will last before we get to that?

Sometime in April?

 

[Keebler]

I wonder, with JA knowing Travis' passwords to everything, did she have his financial/banking information too?
Did she steal money too?

At first, those deposits she made just stuck out as very, very odd.

I have considered that she could be paid for her *talents* along the way and made cash.
Maybe her beauty and nail salon trip was paid for as a favor payment?

Most folks with cash do not deposit it. I'd rather have cash in hand than a debit/credit card.

I don't think the odd banking practice and her receipts that are strange will be left unknown by Juan. I think he's got a huge surprise coming for us.

Perhaps the money was from selling the items she stole from her grandparents' home.

 

[G&AMom]

I've been wondering if Nurmi & Wilmott have some way of "trying out" their case on somebody before the trial starts. Do attorneys do that kind of thing? Obviously, they are stuck with working with what they have and with what Jodi tells them, but their stragety just seems ridiculous to me. Did they really think the prosecution wasn't going to poke any holes in Jodi's story?

I've seen an awful lot of trials recently where the defense came up with a really lame explanation for their client's behavior (the George Huguely trial stands out). It just seems to make their client look worse. I really wonder sometimes why they do it. :waitasec:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I don't think there is a prayer of that happening! :floorlaugh:

My take on Nurmi is that he has a story he wants to tell. He tells it at excruciating length. You (the jurors) don't seem to get it. He tells it again, with more detail. You roll your eyes -- clearly you just don't understand. So he tells the story YET AGAIN, repeating everything all over again, with more details (& more lies from Jodi).

It's like he's just going to keep hammering until you "understand." He has no Plan B, not even a way to tell the story in a different way. That's why, IMHO, he's just not a good lawyer.

BBM

Damn, he sounds just like his guilty client.:floorlaugh:

 

[KMouse]

There is absolutely no evidence in her entire story about being physically abused. She had nothing to "show" for it, so she threw in the finger. In her mind, he did it; regardless of when it happened.

moo

She threw in the physical and emotional abuse, pedophilia, unconsensual sex (rape), Mormon sins to make the jury hate Travis and to elevate herself.
Nurmi asked JA if she still loves Travis to this day. Juan should of asked her if she still hates Travis to this day because that is what is obvious to me.

There's no evidence of her accusations.

Good luck with the domestic violence expert. Nurmi will ask LaViolette how somebody would feel being called "a , a , and a three hole wonder" and how one goes on to develop a shaking chee-wha-wha disorder. Nurmi is going to regurgitate all the carp about the yelling, shaking, stroking the abusers ego...the cycle of abuse...blah blah blah. Juan will then come along and make quick work of this witness.

 

[forb8182]

I'm sitting here reviewing the Nancy Grace weekly review of the case. It's showing her testimony to the juror question asking her to recount the elements of the murder she can remember before she falls in to the very active fog she was in (stabbing, slashing, deleting pictures, dragging, showering, packing, cleaning up, disposing, driving). SHe sits there so weirdly monotone with her creepy claws relating to the screen like she's teaching a course on how she fixed a problem with her computer or something. Good Lord this <mod snip> is just something else.

That's what I've noticed in all her pre-trial interviews and testimony. No emotion when describing the most "horrific", "Mortal Terror", event in your life. There is NOTHING! I fill my husband in everynight about this case and when I repeat her testimony I am over the top animated in the descriptions of what she said happened during every attack, just like it was me experiencing it rather then her, i.e. hands to neck choking, climbing up shelves, lunging at me. That is one cold fish and it's not normal behavior. Only reaction she ever shows is when it's about her and all she has lost.
Another thing that has me furious and if I was the juror that asked this question, I would ask it again. She was asked to take the diagram of the bathroom on the screen and show them how the attack happened. She WOULD NOT touch that screen other than to show where she was when the attack started, otherwise, she talked with her hands and made motions on the table in front of her.
Anyway, off to listen to KCL interview that I missed..

 

[rose222]

I don't think there is a prayer of that happening! :floorlaugh:

My take on Nurmi is that he has a story he wants to tell. He tells it at excruciating length. You (the jurors) don't seem to get it. He tells it again, with more detail. You roll your eyes -- clearly you just don't understand. So he tells the story YET AGAIN, repeating everything all over again, with more details (& more lies from Jodi).

It's like he's just going to keep hammering until you "understand." He has no Plan B, not even a way to tell the story in a different way. That's why, IMHO, he's just not a good lawyer.

I've been watching Seinfeld (gotta do something to pass the time till Wednesday!) and I came across the scene where Newman and Kramer are in court for a speeding ticket. The way Newman rambles on and on is so funny. Reminds of me Nurmi except that Newman was dramatic and funny whereas Nurmi is oh-so-boring. Plus this is a real murder trial. Oh well.

 

[G&AMom]

BBM

Damn, he sounds just like his guilty client.:floorlaugh:

Yes, there is an element of that! Not suggesting he's as nuts as she is, but he seems seriously out of touch.