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

[panthera]

According to Jodi, she got the "stack of pamphlets" at the mall.

Not likely IMO

Not unless it was a sting operation to lure in all the pedophiles. Imagine distributing such literature and anyone picking up a pamphlet gets busted?

:what:

 

[Really?]

He has never changed his opinion of which came first. In fact he was never even asked that question by anyone until he was deposed by the defense and then he answered truthfully, imo.

IMO

OK, now I will listen to it again. I could almost swear he threw in a lot of "may haves", "could haves" and "might haves"

Moo

 

[panthera]

When did she do those 3 deposits? Before Mesa, or after?

TIA

Her "road trip" deposits were in California, prior to arriving in Arizona.

MOO

 

[minor4th]

What say you of generalities? I'm predicting the defense DV expert testifies only to those behaviors exhibited by Jodi that could be consistent with victims in addition to a lot of generalities - like how women leave their abuser on average 7 times before leaving permanently, sexual coercion being common in IPV, etc.

It's hard to say because Jodi's behavior does not fit the profile, and I think we can all see that. So can the expert, I'm sure lol.

Yes, I think she will generally explain the psychological dynamic and the various circumstances that are usually present in such relationships. Then she could go through the instances in Jodi's testimony that could fit within that dynamic --but again, it will all be based on the assumption that Jodi is telling the truth throughout her testimony.

 

[pinkie60]

jodie is just like dahlia dippolito, she was caught on tape trying to hire a hit man to kill her husband, and flat out denied it never happened. ( i think she got 20 yrs) i just don't see how she can plead self defense. i don't think she has one bit of remorse for travis

 

[LambChop]

Do you have a link to this? Sounds very interesting. Was someone in the car with her? HMMMMMM

They did say cigarette smoke. They said smoke. She had 2 kerosene cans in the trunk and it is thought that she stopped and burned the evidence in the desert. jmo

 

[minor4th]

Not unless it was a sting operation to lure in all the pedophiles. Imagine distributing such literature and anyone picking up a pamphlet gets busted?

:what:

Right? Who in the world is going to pick up a "So, you think you're a pedophile..." pamphlet from the mall?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Naturally when the Domestic Violence Expert takes the stand (and there might be more than one, or one that specializes in this and that) If they give testimony that in their professional opinion from interviewing Jodi and reading all the material written between them, they conclude she was abused by him and she displays classic signs of abuse.

I can disagree with her but we all know I am no DV expert, I am just saying I don't agree. Her testimony might stand as fact for the Defense and the Jury can made their individual decisions if it "moved" them.

The jury is not DV experts either but I think they will disagree with her. Juan also is calling an expert in his rebuttal case so they will get two sides. One side (state expert) imo will sound much more logical when applied to JA. The expert is also to testify that TA does not meet the profile of a pedophile or an DV abuser.

I think what is going to happen here is pretty much what happened in the last case where Juan Martinez put a woman on death row. That woman also testified for 9 days. She claimed self defense and DV abuse.........on and on she droned making up one lie after another with nothing to support it. DV experts testified for both sides. Sound familiar?

The jury believed Wendi Ariano so much they put her on death row where she deserved to be.

This is what is going to happen to this lying murderer too.

A direct examination is only good if it holds up under a thorough cross examination. The truth will be brought to light just as soon as Juan stands up and starts questioning JA.

IMO

 

[lil_buddy]

Wish they would make up their minds what Travis "liked". He was (according to the defense/JA) a non-preferential pedophile who favored boys and girls???

:waitasec:

Yep that's what they're saying. I think once all is said and done - this will be the LEAST preposterous claim from JA. Mark my words!
(joking around here folks)

 

[Karmady]

Because that's what the ME stated and he is the unbiased expert they need to rely on. I'm sure they are not pleased with his findings either and probably do not believe it actually went down that way. But can you imagine what it would look like if they hired an independent medical examiner to give an opinion that conflicted with the official ME report?

And since it doesn't really alter much - she could have planned to shoot first but suddenly changed her mind at the last minute- they are rolling with it.

~bbm

I may have missed that part, though. I thought the State was gunning for stabbed first b/c of dp considerations, so the ME testified accordingly. Did he reach conclusions about the order of things in his report? That's what I may have missed.

 

[miss.krissy]

I haven't been on the board for a couple of days so forgive me if anyone else has brought this up. Have you seen Gus Searcy on JVM?
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/02/14/arias-friend-she-called-me-night

 

[Really?]

Do you have a link to this? Sounds very interesting. Was someone in the car with her? HMMMMMM

no.....

 

[panthera]

Right? Who in the world is going to pick up a "So, you think you're a pedophile..." pamphlet from the mall?

Just another of her outrageous lies.

Not even Dateline uncovers the offenders this way.....

:floorlaugh:

 

[StephanieHartPI]

I've done a bit of research and I believe PPL was originally founded by a mormon in the 70's. Does anyone else have info on this?

yes, i have read that also.

 

[Really?]

When did she do those 3 deposits? Before Mesa, or after?

TIA

b4......

 

[Pink Panther]

Has there been any discussion here about how her "blog" seems to mirror his? It's weird. It's like she was stalking his blog too and mirroring his posts. Has this come up in any way in trial or on the boards here?

 

[SoBeCzar]

Ok. I just think semantics matter in this case. IMO, Jodi ruthlessly slaughtered a completely defenseless man. If we even hint at the possibility that there was a "fight" or that Travis fought back, we open the door to defense claims that Travis caused Jodi to be in reasonable apprehension of imminent harm.

I don't think it would mean that at all. It is common to say a victim fought back when they have defensive wounds. They may be trying to protect themselves but it would be very hard to protect yourself without a form of contact not considered fighting. It is what it is. If he tried to shove the knife away, he fought back. The jury is intelligent enough to not get this misconstrued.

 

[getReal]

I've done a bit of research and I believe PPL was originally founded by a mormon in the 70's. Does anyone else have info on this?

How about including a link to your researched factoid?

 

[Morning Glory]

Dr. Daniela's input here about Jodi Arias and perceptions about sexuality and the trial.

[video=youtube;hUYh_M4A4B0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUYh_M4A4B0[/video]

 

[panthera]

Ok. I just think semantics matter in this case. IMO, Jodi ruthlessly slaughtered a completely defenseless man. If we even hint at the possibility that there was a "fight" or that Travis fought back, we open the door to defense claims that Travis caused Jodi to be in reasonable apprehension of imminent harm.

With the operative word being "reasonable". Wouldn't she have to retreat from causing him further harm than necessary for her to get away from him? At least that was my understanding, notwithstanding he may have tried to get the knife away from her.

:waitasec: