Jodi Arias Murder Trial - the defense continues it's case in chief-*Weekend* #89

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #481
I am really curious about what Jodi was doing for the 2 weeks prior to her arrest. Who was she seeing, where was she going, who she talked to, how she was acting? I wonder if LE was watching her in Yreka during that time. I know she went to the memorial, but I just wonder what else she was doing during that time.
 
  • #482
Question related to the new interrogation video. The jury has not seen it, correct? If not, why? They've seen portions of the video, including her stretching, right? Did the defense team object to showing the full video? TIA.

My understanding from hln and here is the judge kept it out
 
  • #483
I get the feeling he is telling her to please stop adding so many unnecessary details, etc. because you are opening too many windows to the other side and she just will not listen. She thinks she is so clever. He seems exasperated with her.

but she keeps adding details..details that Nurmi probably has never heard. She is trying to build upon her lies thinking each extra detail adds validity to her story. I don't buy it. I am sure the jury notices and does not buy it. The words she speaks is just adding to her downfall and proving she just can't stop lying, She does not get it so I say keep on talking Jodi.
 
  • #484
My understanding from hln and here is the judge kept it out

I don't understand why evidence showing her state of mind after her arrest, and theatrics that included are being kept out. All these little pieces being kept out paint a bigger picture of who JA is. Yet all this uncorroborated nonsense about TA is fair game.

I can imagine a jury member learning about this after the trial, as well as her being found sleeping in his bed/hiding in his closet after he comes home from dates, the forged letters etc. etc. They may be left thinking "had I only known this, I would have had a different opinion."
 
  • #485
I've been thinking about the testimony about the fight or flight mode hmmm...If JA was really in such a panic and truely scared for her life I hope JM uses the defence expert's own words. I just keeep hearing the word FLIGHT in my mind. As in run out, leave. She could have chosen door number one you know. There was absolutely no reason to fight. He was wet and naked.

You know how it is in a lover's quarrel, you want to get your two cents in...fatal attraction.
 
  • #486
Question related to the new interrogation video. The jury has not seen it, correct? If not, why? They've seen portions of the video, including her stretching, right? Did the defense team object to showing the full video? TIA.

It has been characterized by legal experts as "not probative" and "prejudicial".

Not sure about attempts to include/exclude it, but it cuts both ways with respect to both characterizations.

As she's acting inappropriate in the video, it may help to establish PTSD or other state of mind consistent with domestic violence victimization.

Her demeanor was nutty enough to imply that she's faking insanity in order to establish insanity defense, but as she ultimately didn't plead insanity (recording is from nearly five years ago) perhaps not helpful.

She comes across as uncaring, happy-go-lucky, carefree and entirely insensitive to her victim -- not to mention being seemingly unconcerned about her circumstances. Helpful to prosecution? Prejudicial (regarding the jury) if it's not probative?

I would need to see the entire hours-long interrogation video to place it within a context, but I don't intend to waste my time that way.

She is a lying torture-murderess who needs to be convicted and executed as soon as possible.
 
  • #487
She said Daryl demonstrated how to load/shoot a gun but that she didn't handle it. Don't recall what she said about camping, sorry.

The camping story was at the beginning of trial when JA was talking about going camping with her family back at the time when she had an "idyllic childhood". Back before Mommy put that big, bad wooden spoon in her purse:rolleyes:
 
  • #488
but she keeps adding details..details that Nurmi probably has never heard. She is trying to build upon her lies thinking each extra detail adds validity to her story. I don't buy it. I am sure the jury notices and does not buy it. The words she speaks is just adding to her downfall and proving she just can't stop lying, She does not get it so I say keep on talking Jodi.

I agree. Just like she added the gun holster story. I mean it came from out of no where. She was questioned about the gun on direct-Made no mention of holster. Questioned on cross- no holster after Juror questions Again questioned by nurmi- no holster, Jm- gun had holster,box, ammo, saw him load it, took it with him somewhere etc..I mean you could literally see her fabricating right on the spot.
She simply cannot help herself. I wondered at first why Juan didn't get the Judge to admonish her for not answering yes or no to questions but I see why now. The more she talks, she lies and adds facts that can be ripped apart with evidence.
Just like the gas can story we have now, she was adamant about not going to SLC and filling up with 3 cans. She even added that she returned the gas cans and got a cash refund and then BAM JM tells us that walmart doesn't have a record of ANY gas cans returned. Now the jury knows she lied to them. They might of excused her lies to other but now they know she lied to them, it's personal now and they wont like it. Now walmart will be in the rebuttal and she's going down faster than she drops her pants for men.
 
  • #489
As far as adding details I literally face-palmed when she said TA may have had the knife, and when asked why she never brought it up before "nobody asked me". You've got to be kidding me. I have faith at least some jury members picked up on that nonsense.
 
  • #490
I've been thinking about the testimony about the fight or flight mode hmmm...If JA was really in such a panic and truely scared for her life I hope JM uses the defence expert's own words. I just keeep hearing the word FLIGHT in my mind. As in run out, leave. She could have chosen door number one you know. There was absolutely no reason to fight. He was wet and naked.

But since she had not yet killed him, she's not about to flee.

She was there on a mission which she had not yet accomplished while he was still alive in that shower, going to Cancun and living the rest of his life mostly without her in it.

Even more implausible is the fact that she never phones for help. Even in stressful situations women -- especially abused women -- call 911 every day. Many end up not pressing charges, but many do call.

If you had just butchered and shot a guy according to your detailed scheme, you're not calling 911 because it's nothing like self defense.

Travis wouldn't cooperate. He refused to die peacefully in that shower. What trouble he made for her!

And this is where other killers are more 'clever' than JA. They call 911 or arrange to have someone else call with their concocted stories and/or alibis on the record right away.

If she really wanted to get away with it, she left far too much to circumstance, and WAY too much evidence.

JA was entirely ineffective with the some (most?) of the jury members. Their questions proved as much.

She is too clever by half. She fancied herself a professional photographer, but she had no idea how digital data are stored and recovered.

I'll bet she knows now and would like a do-over.

She is the kind who goes on to kill again. The only questions are whom and how many would have met Travis's end?
 
  • #491
Trial Procedural Question: So when the defense rests its case, there can be a rebuttal case by the prosecution. Correct? Can the prosecution call it's on "Expert" witnesses to rebut this Samuels guy? Is there a published witness list for the rebuttal case? and the big question...can JM call Jodie back to the stand???

Yes, the state will put on a rebuttal case.
Janeen Demarte will be called by the state during rebuttal, her home was burglarized back in Feb and her laptop was stolen.
No published list that I know of.
The state cannot call a defendant to the witness stand, ever.


Laptop belonging to expert witness in Arias trial stolen

Demarte is a clinical psychologist who evaluated Jodi Arias. She is scheduled to be a key rebuttal witness for the prosecution in the case.
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/story/21010530/2013/02/06/expert-witness-in-arias-trial-has-home-burglarized
 
  • #492
It has been characterized by legal experts as "not probative" and "prejudicial".

Not sure about attempts to include/exclude it, but it cuts both ways with respect to both characterizations.

As she's acting inappropriate in the video, it may help to establish PTSD or other state of mind consistent with domestic violence victimization.

Her demeanor was nutty enough to imply that she's faking insanity in order to establish insanity defense, but as she ultimately didn't plead insanity (recording is from nearly five years ago) perhaps not helpful.

She comes across as uncaring, happy-go-lucky, carefree and entirely insensitive to her victim -- not to mention being seemingly unconcerned about her circumstances. Helpful to prosecution? Prejudicial (regarding the jury) if it's not probative?

I would need to see the entire hours-long interrogation video to place it within a context, but I don't intend to waste my time that way.

She is a lying torture-murderess who needs to be convicted and executed as soon as possible.

I'm not sure which version of the video is making the rounds here but fox showed an extended vversion last night where just before she stands on her head,, she asks LE if she can put some make-up on before being processed. Paraphrasing but she said something like "I know this is going to show you how incredibly shallow i am but can I please put some makeup on before you book me"...
 
  • #493

I agree. Just like she added the gun holster story. I mean it came from out of no where. She was questioned about the gun on direct-Made no mention of holster. Questioned on cross- no holster after Juror questions Again questioned by nurmi- no holster, Jm- gun had holster,box, ammo, saw him load it, took it with him somewhere etc..I mean you could literally see her fabricating right on the spot.
She simply cannot help herself. I wondered at first why Juan didn't get the Judge to admonish her for not answering yes or no to questions but I see why now. The more she talks, she lies and adds facts that can be ripped apart with evidence.
Just like the gas can story we have now, she was adamant about not going to SLC and filling up with 3 cans. She even added that she returned the gas cans and got a cash refund and then BAM JM tells us that walmart doesn't have a record of ANY gas cans returned. Now the jury knows she lied to them. They might of excused her lies to other but now they know she lied to them, it's personal now and they wont like it. Now walmart will be in the rebuttal and she's going down faster than she drops her pants for men.

LOL@ "faster than she drops her pants for men"
I think the holster story came from when JM was asking about how she managed to reach the gun that was in the corner of the top shelf of the closet so fast. After she slept on it, she decided that being in a holster, it would be easier for her to reach. What she didn't think about is that being in the holster, THAT would even take MORE TIME to get it out. So maybe it wasn't in a holster, aww she just doesn't remember.
 
  • #494
Has it come out yet exactly what pictures were deleted and which ones were not. I know that LE were able to retrieve the deleted photos but wondered which ones were not. tia
 
  • #495
When trials over, watch for his book! I'm just sayin.......

I call Gus the "Lilttle Camper guy". I still laugh at the thought of him getting ready for court as he stands in his little camper bathroom - putting on his big proud PPL ring and over sized watch. LOL!!! Thanks to KCL who embedded this image in my mind :)

Does anyone remember this.. He testified that him and Arias did not have sex the night she slept in his little camper. His reason was because she had a boyfriend. hahahahahaha! It couldn't be that he's like, 178 yrs old or anything. LOL!
 
  • #496
The camping story was at the beginning of trial when JA was talking about going camping with her family back at the time when she had an "idyllic childhood". Back before Mommy put that big, bad wooden spoon in her purse:rolleyes:
That camping tale has always seemed odd to me but I haven't heard that much about it. Is the prevailing suspicion that there never was a camping trip and she just made that up to explain the gun? (Just another example of her having AN explanation bit not a BELIEVABLE explanation).
I may have missed a thread on the gnu found at time of arrest, so please forgive me if this has already been discussed but what are leading theories about why she really bought that 9mm?
 
  • #497
Re: Jury Instructions

Here is an excerpt from Connecticut Criminal Jury Instructions (BBM)

2.4-3 Impeachment -- Inconsistent Statements

Revised to November 1, 2008

Evidence has been presented that a witness, <insert name of witness>, made [a] statement outside of court that (is/are) inconsistent with (his/her) trial testimony. You should consider this evidence only as it relates to the credibility of the witness's testimony, not as substantive evidence. In other words, consider such evidence as you would any other evidence of inconsistent conduct in determining the weight to be given to the testimony of the witness in court.

[<Include if appropriate:> The law treats an omission in a prior statement as an inconsistent statement.]

Commentary

Inconsistencies are not limited to diametrically opposed statements, but include omissions and denials of recollection. State v. Simpson, 286 Conn. 634, 649 (2008).

Wonder if Arizona has something similar???

I like the fact that it is specifically addressed here and hope this is the case in Arizona.
 
  • #498
That camping tale has always seemed odd to me but I haven't heard that much about it. Is the prevailing suspicion that there never was a camping trip and she just made that up to explain the gun? (Just another example of her having AN explanation bit not a BELIEVABLE explanation).
I may have missed a thread on the gnu found at time of arrest, so please forgive me if this has already been discussed but what are leading theories about why she really bought that 9mm?

Let's see...there are 2 stories.
1. She was going on a camping /gold mine trip with a few guys she knew, and trusted...although she would be the only woman, so just for safety.

2. She had written suicide letters and sent them grandma-ma to be opened later. She certainly couldn't kill herself in Yreka. It was to small of a city, and everybody new everybody's business, plus she didn't want to do that to her family. So she rented a car, already had the gun....so she was leaving town to do it BUT darn ~ she was arressted before she could kill herself.

So pick one, anyone you want. Because neither are true in my opinion.
 
  • #499
Problems with Juan's theory of the crime;

Jodi behaved like a female stranger rapist on June 4th. She had coerced Travis to wash off the DNA of their prior sexual encounters before killing him, just like some rapists have been reported doing with their victims (although with force). That was the primary motive for the shower ruse. Juan should have stressed this to the jury instead of presenting the motive as a way to lower his defenses. He also should have stressed that this murder was not a contract killing. Jodi was emotionally attached to the victim. It is not unlikely that at one point she had second thoughts and this would explain the sex that night. But something afterwards re triggered her (likely the fight thy had in his office downstairs). This counters Nurmi's contention that she would have killed him immediately if she had premeditated the murder. He's treating the state's case as an assassin for hire. But it was nothing like that.

I mention this because many Jodi supporters bring these issues up (the shower ruse and the sex) when arguing for self-defense. I fear that some jurors may be thinking like them and not looking at the bigger picture.

I missed the early testimony and so don't know what was revealed in terms of TA's hard drive. Is there evidence that JA and TA were in his office/on his computer during the afternoon of June 4th?

If this was discussed in court, would appreciate knowing the day so that I can go back and watch it.

MOO, but I tend to discount anything JA has alleged, unless it can be proven.
 
  • #500
http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2013...otos-nancy-grace-mysteries-day-4?hpt=sizzling
A lot of them are at this link. However, I have seen most of these recently. The police took them of the crime scene so i dont know how the Defence has them and there is some question about the prosecutor not having them.. that is all confusing to me!

I think, only think mind you, that Juan's problem is that the defence are going to use some or all of these photos during the rest of Samuels' testimony. Juan is angry that the defence had not told him this in time for him to prepare his rebuttal.

I don't believe they are photos belonging to the defence per se, just that they have not disclosed their use of them in a timely manner. JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
2,171
Total visitors
2,285

Forum statistics

Threads
632,510
Messages
18,627,798
Members
243,174
Latest member
daydoo93
Back
Top