Jodi Arias TAKES THE STAND #37 *may contain graphic and adult content*

[gitana1]

In this case wikipedia is accurate; there is no psychological diagnosis of psychopathy.
If this is not correct, I would love to read about it from a reputable source.

The Hare checklist is used in criminal justice and it should be noted that
Robert Hare himself has expressed grave concerns regarding the use of his checklist in criminal justice.
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/26/136619689/can-a-test-really-tell-whos-a-psychopath

There are changes to th DSM and arguments regarding it, all the time. IMO, a psych cannot clinically diagnose a person as being a sociopath or psychopath - both would fall under the antisocial personality disorder label - but they are well aware that those two disorders exist as psychological disorders.

Here are a couple of articles about that. One is about how the DSM is too general by not having a separate designation just for psychopaths: http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html.

The other is a long journal article stating the same thing and advocating for a separate designation: http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/peterson/psy430s2001/Hare RD Psychopathy JAP 1991.pdf

I'm just not sure why this is important.

Just to confuse matters more, there is another neck wound if you look at the autopsy report.

I think it's possible that the first picture that shows a bloody Travis might have been during the fight, before he got down the hallway. The blood would be from the stab wound to the neck, but the fully slashed throat wouldn't have happened yet.

I just think that because of the timing. Clearly the very next picture does show her dragging him, so I do think the throat slashing and everything but the final gunshot wound had happened by then.

I'm in the 'F-U gunshot' as the final wound camp (the shot was more symbolic than anything, thus an F-U shot). I think she did that back in the bathroom, either with him on the floor or when she finally got into the shower to clean both herself and him off.

I don't think the exact details matter very much, but I do think they are interesting. The fact that there are pictures still amazes me.

I don't think what she has said in any of her lies has to mean anything particularly truthful about the fight. She may have been hoping the evidence didn't match her ninja story so she could argue that her 'confession' was coerced or delusional. Who knows! Shades of Amanda Knox there, imho. If folks bought it, she thinks that's excellent, and if they didn't she knows it 'shows' that she wasn't aware of the real evidence = she didn't do it. There are all kinds of slimy tricks murderers play with confessions

What "fight"? Travis had defensive wounds. Jodi did not.

It is apparent to me that she kept killing him because he wouldn't die fast enough and because he tried in vain to lurch away, not because he put up any fight. IMO she disabled him with the first shot or stab (whichever came first). What followed were his death throes.

Paying enough for my cable tv, so I'm watching my money's worth lately.

I love the way the British sounding panel guest on JVM , Simone Benet, speaks about this case, but today she is making too much of the 12 yr. old girl comment Travis made. Not sure it's a deviant thing to say. Someone on here said it's like BritSpears when she had the knee socks school girl look in her "Oops, I did it again" type of image. Simone says it is so sick she'd tell the guy off then and there. Well, Jodi gushed all over it. Travis said it in a more naive way, IMO.

OT news - Investigation Discovery on Sat. night, Devil Inside, is going to cover the Chris Coleman case. He had a mistress, and he ended up killing his wife and two sons. He even had a wedding date set with the mistress beforehand.

Oh man! I couldn't stand that woman! She kept saying that Jodi was a victim and was abused!!! Ackkkkk!!!!!

She makes errors of "tense" often. Here you see her about to say "I was stern" (with Travis during the assault) stops, corrects herself...


(Detective: seems like from what you are telling me she was the aggressor? and he was the more passive)

Jodi:
I guess so. Ya I mean there was definitely aggression, as far as I mean I don't know what you define as aggression by, its like, I was, there was a sternness

I think he knew she was there and was allowing a few photos to be taken, however I think this is when she caught him off guard, he knelt, or looked down, or crouched for whatever reason. She pulled the gun out and shot.

And I believe he was screaming like she describes (and holding his head) making his way to his knees.

I am 100% with ya and I felt that way too when I saw her video. It is chilling. Horrible.

 

[fabvab]

And where did she get such reading material? I have never heard of them. For that I think the person goes to a Therapist. And my guess is they don't have "So Your Doctor Says You Are A Pedophile"


(like we used to hand out, So Your Doctor Says You Have High Blood Pressure)

Exactly! I guess it could be a police sting...Set up a "Pedophile Pamphlet" and then monitor/watch who takes them. I'm sure Jodi will tell us where she got them when Juan asks. I can't wait!!!!

 

[lil_buddy]

And where did she get such reading material? I have never heard of them. For that I think the person goes to a Therapist. And my guess is they don't have "So Your Doctor Says You Are A Pedophile"


(like we used to hand out, So Your Doctor Says You Have High Blood Pressure)

She says she got it at the mall.:waitasec:

 

[magpie]

No, if the trial is still going on March 4, it starts at 11:30 est

IS is only broadcasting from 9-11 starting March 4.

So, IS will not be carrying any of the trial. Still 2 weeks before the IS schedule changes. If the trial is not complete by then, maybe HLN will carry it.

Thanks for answering. So TruTV has rendered themselves useless IMO. I still miss the old CourtTV days when they were all about trials all day long.

 

[elementary]

I have provided valid references that confirm psychopathy is NOT a psychological diagnosis.

The information is provided for those who are interested in knowing that 'psychopathy' does not have a clear definition in modern psychology and want to further research the psychological underpinnings of this case.

I think I'm missing something here. What is your point in all this?

ETA: Oh, okay I skimmed the link. It does not validate anything. At this point, with all due respect, I am removing myself from this discussion.

 

[LambChop]

I have provided valid references that confirm psychopathy is NOT a psychological diagnosis.

The information is provided for those who are interested in knowing that 'psychopathy' does not have a clear definition in modern psychology and want to further research the psychological underpinnings of this case.

Well, as my grandmother would say, "She crazier than a bedbug and let's just leave it go at that." :floorlaugh:

 

[princesspjs]

The ME is a court expert in these matters. His opinion that there was not significant bleeding around the entrance wound, and that the resultant incapacitation would be inconsistent with the other trauma, should be given more weight. At least that's what I think. Also, I look at that picture and immediately think neck wound. Retired paramedic, for what that's worth. I've seen lots of head and neck trauma in my day. :cat:

The battered woman "experts" have yet to testify and I can already say with almost certainty that I will not agree with most of what they say if they try to testify that she was a battered and abused woman.

Evidence in a trial is just that someone is "putting something out there" for the jury to think about and weigh in their own minds how that testimony fits into the rest of the puzzle.

<mod snip>

 

[A_News_Junkie]

No, if the trial is still going on March 4, it starts at 11:30 est

IS is only broadcasting from 9-11 starting March 4.

So, IS will not be carrying any of the trial. Still 2 weeks before the IS schedule changes. If the trial is not complete by then, maybe HLN will carry it.

We should write Oprah and tell her there is a demand for trials - her network needs help!

(NOT --- NOT advocating a letter writing campain, as that is against TOS just tossing an idea out!)

No court tv.
Now useless InSession.
Epic fail for open justice. :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[LambChop]

She says she got it at the mall.:waitasec:

Yep. Probably at the information booth right alongside the maps of California.

 

[StephanieHartPI]

The only way I would doubt the ME is if she or he had been bought in the past. I also think there is otherwise a miniscule chance of mistake, although it happens. No one else was there, the ME was, and I marvel at the hubris of those who think they know better. It's one thing to speculate, but it is another to decide. I hope the two don't get confused.

Its definitely speculation (i should say speculation if I say what i think happened), however with other M.E (albeit going off reports) all in disagreement, then my guess is due to the advanced state of decomposition this was just a hard point to conclude. However the M.E. that did it made his conclusion which stands.

The bad thing is if those conclusions are ever disproved (in any case) But in this case there is a confession, so in the big scheme of things.. well.. she killed him, he is dead, there was a struggle, he has defensive wounds, those are the important facts not in dispute luckily.

 

[pinkie60]

Jodi says she mailed pamphlets about pedophilia to TA. I took it to mean pamphlets to help someone overcome this disorder. Do they even make them? It's against the law...and taboo...and sickening.

i catch doing this a lot, excuse me, i don't believe she said specifically pedophilia,iirc she said help with his disorder...she alluded to pedophilia before that statement and leads you to believe in your mind, it was for pedophilia. she is really shrewd. to be honest, her lawyer should have asked her specifically what disorder she meant and to describe what the pamphlet included. of course all the defense can do for her is to muddy the waters.

 

[LambChop]

The battered woman "experts" have yet to testify and I can already say with almost certainty that I will not agree with most of what they say if they try to testify that she was a battered and abused woman.

Evidence in a trial is just that someone is "putting something out there" for the jury to think about and weigh in their own minds how that testimony fits into the rest of the puzzle.

Also, if you want to become "verified" as an expert here based on your retired paramedic experience, you can PM a mod. If not, just the fact that you state you are a retired paramedic does not give your opinion any more or less value than someone who prefers to keep their personal life and occupation "unverified".

I think any opinion is valued if it is based on fact regardless if they are verified or not. I think a paramedic would be able to verify what we see in the picture before they are first responders. Paramedics and EMT's are highly respected in the medical field. And that is a fact. As for myself, I would respect their opinion. jmo

 

[princesspjs]

She is so defensive and then almost a confrontational tone. She knows she was the assailant and I think, not sure, the Detective wants to dis the female assailant (maybe he already caught on the female is really Jodi) so he calls the female assailant aggressive which is really calling Jodi a name. And she shoots back very fast as if to say "who you calling aggressive? did you just call me a name??"

--------------------------------
(Detective: seems like from what you are telling me she was the aggressor? and he was the more passive)

Jodi:
I guess so. Ya I mean there was definitely aggression, as far as I mean I don't know what you define as aggression by, its like, I was, there was a sternness

Unbolded and rebolded by me.....that is very telling!

 

[makayla]

I've been reading up more closely. I came across an article that said some of the juror's questions were indicative of their doubts regarding the prosecution's case.

I'm not interested in the least about how the jurors appear to be during this trial. We heard so much about the jurors during the KC trial and it all proved to be false!

Is anyone getting real nervous about next week and the inevitable verdict in this case? I am. If this jury takes more than a day I'll be in a state of panic. I'm a little superstitious too. For the KC trial I remember making cakes and other goodies in preparation for the sweet verdict that never came.

bbm . . . please don't bake anything this time (just in case!)

I am hoping we have a completely different verdict this time around, otherwise I will lose all faith in juries! :banghead:

 

[princesspjs]

I think any opinion is valued if it is based on fact regardless if they are verified or not. I think a paramedic would be able to verify what we see in the picture before they are first responders. Paramedics and EMT's are highly respected in the medical field. And that is a fact. As for myself, I would respect their opinion. jmo

I'm just stating how it has worked at WS since about 4 years before I actually signed up.

 

[BritsKate]

Just FWIW. It would appear that antisocial and psychopathic traits are being combined in the DSM V. Unfortunately the criteria text is removed from the APA's website so I'm unable to confirm.

Due to its history, well-established validity, obvious importance in forensic settings, and relationships to other types of psychopathology and other problems, a revised construct of ASPD that includes psychopathic personality features has been recommended for retention in DSM-5.

http://www.deviersprong.nl/files/Paginas/Journal_of_personality_disorders_april_2011.pdf

Antisocial/Psychopathic types have inflated grandiosity and a pervasive pattern of taking advantage of other people.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...m-v-offers-new-criteria-personality-disorders

Description of the diagnostic categories of the PDs
in the DSM-V draft
a) Antisocial/psychopathic disorder
This category not only includes the disinhibition and
irresponsibility component but also that of meanness,
that is, the traits related with lack of sensitivity or lack
of remorse, manipulativeness and predatory aggression.
All of this is very similar to the current factors II and I of
psychopathy. There is abundant evidence that these two
factors differentiate in terms of their neurobiological
correlates, which offers a solid base in relationship to
these subtypes.
The antisocial type coincides greatly with the current
criteria. In turn, persons who coincide with the
psychopathic type are arrogant and egocentric, seek
power over others and manipulate them or take
advantage of them in order to inflict harm and to
achieve their objectives. They are insensitive and show a
little empathy unless these coincide with their interests.
They show disdain for the rights, property or safety of
others, and do not feel guilt or remorse about the harm
they cause. They act aggressively or sadistically towards
others in pursuit of their personal interest and seem to
obtain pleasure or satisfaction when dominating,
humiliating or degrading others. They also have a
superficial charm and capacity to please when it is
convenient to their purposes. They show little
conventional moral principles and tend to deny
responsibility for their acts and to blame others for their
own failures and defects.
The domains and descriptive traits of this disorder are
the following: 1. Antagonism: Insensitivity; 2.
Antagonism: Aggression; 3. Antagonism:
Manipulativeness; 4. Antagonism: Hostility; 5.
Antagonism: Deceitfulness; 6. Antagonism: Narcissism;
7. Disinhibition: Irresponsibility; 8. Disinhibition:
Imprudence; 9. Disinhibition: Impulsiveness.

http://www.ehu.es/echeburua/pdfs/Personality Disorders in DSM-V.pdf

 

[Tracey4AU]

Whew... there are quite the 'tudes in here tonight.

I'm not claiming to be smarter than anyone else, just stating my opinion. Take it FWIW.. which granted, ain't much!

It just makes no sense to me that JA would think for a second she would be able to subdue TA with a knife. What does make sense is that the sequence of events was just as she told Det Flores.... shot first and the gun locked up. From there, she doesn't reveal what happens. But the closer her story remains to the truth, without implicating herself, of course, the more likely it matches with the evidence.

All that being said, just because it makes sense to me doesn't make it so.

I'm done on that debate. You're welcome.

 

[Really?]

Why does she wear makeup some days in trial (JA) and other days not ???????

 

[lil_buddy]

Yep. Probably at the information booth right alongside the maps of California.

At the mall? I've only seen those in bus stations or ...truck stops!
Maybe she got some pamphlets while she was dying her hair in the truck stop.

(Just kidding!!!!!! )

 

[LambChop]

At the mall? I've only seen those in bus stations or ...truck stops!
Maybe she got some pamphlets while she was dying her hair in the truck stop.

(Just kidding!!!!!! )

Or Las Vegas. They have all types of flyers there.....well, they use to. Haven't been there in years. jmo