Jodi Arias; the sequence of events

[Smelly Squirrel]

JM is going to do what he's going to do. But, don't think he has this case sewn up, yet. He doesn't. We are not arguing about who killed him. She's admitted she killed him. We are arguing about why she killed him and why she killed him the way she did and that goes to what charge the Jury will finally settle on.

Who's we? And it never matters why, as long as you can prove they did it.

Aside from I don't believe knife first is what happened, it knocks the feet out from under premeditation. Haven't you heard people say that?

No, just you.

Why would she steal a gun to kill him, file a police report, have it printed in the papers, drive 1000 miles with it,

That's more of a question as to why she would use the gun at all.

and then get into a knife fight with a bigger, stronger opponent when she gets there?

A "knife fight" is when both people have knives.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

although I do believe Travis's neck was slashed in the bedroom, at the end of the hall, I never thought the picture of her dragging him was at that location....I believe the camera remained where it was when it was "dropped", and that that photo was taken in the bathroom after she had dragged him most of the way back to the shower....I believe the lighting in that photo indicates it was taken in the bathroom

No, it's taken from right at the end of the hallway, it may even have been on the carpet. You can tell from the the pattern on the tile.

Look at these two attachments and see how the green arrow is pointing to the beginning of a pattern on the tile, and how they match.

 

[katydid23]

I don't think the jury really cares if he was shot first or stabbed first. JMO

But I think the case can be made that EITHER way, it was a cold blooded murder. It does not really matter if it was a bullet to the head that started it off or a knife to the chest, it was a brutal, vicious act.

It is fascinating to discuss it and speculate. But we will probably never know for certain which way it went down. :cry: :rose:

 

[molly333]

Juan doesn't have to say 'gun first.' Because Jodi is doing that herself.

And he has already gotten her to ADMIT that after she shot him, and he was down, she left and then RETURNED to him with a knife. That in itself ends the self-defense claims. She had no excuse for coming back to that bathroom to stab an incapacitated man, clinging to life.

I know! In her story alone, she admits to murder one. [[Although I'm sure her experts will say abused woman, yada, yada, yada]

So why mess with it and say, no, she's lying, it was knife first? And, looks more like self defense?

It's like both sides are arguing the wrong side.

IMO

 

[ERRN1313]

The ME said it was slightly upwards and she is 3 inches shorter than him so that would be correct if they were both standing. Dr. Horn also stated he did not believe Travis would have been able to stand had he been shot first, not that it could not have happened, just that under normal conditions for a shot in that area of the brain he would have been unable to move his arms upward to protect himself.

Anyone shot in the head goes into shock regardless of whether they are conscious, walking around, talking, or not. A bullet wound to the head will cause the body to go into shock immediately. So he would not have been a threat after she shot him and would probably not have had those defensive wounds had he been shot first.

If you read his report and listen to his testimony it was not just one thing that lead Dr. Horn to believe Travis was not shot first. If you listen to Jodi about how that shot occurred it is obvious, the way she explained it, that she did not shoot him first. Shooting him as he is coming towards her would mean the bullet's path would have been front to back in his skull, even if he turned his head slightly as she describes. The bullet's path was from slightly behind him with the gun pointed down. That is not self defense, that's execution. Forensics does not lie regardless of whether or not we believe the shot was first or last.

Jodi made the sign with her hand of gripping the knife and yet she claims to have no memory. Gripping the imaginary knife sure looked as if she was remembering to me. Jodi did train in martial arts from what we have heard. Also she admitted sparing with a friend of MM's (she mentioned because it upset MM) in someone's back yard where they were using fake knives or swords. So it sounds as if she was familiar with fighting with a knife. jmo

Just because she is 3 inches shorter doesn't cause the knife wound to be in an upward manner, most woman slash in a downward manner, knife held above and brought down. Being shorter it would be in a lower part of the body. An upward knife wound indicates the knife was held lower and brought UP for the stabbing. Hard to describe what I'm trying to illustrate. Like I said, shower scene from Psycho, downward stabbing. Think of the crime shows where a guy goes up to someone and stabs from below, you don't see the knife swinging downward, it is an up thrust motion.

Being in "shock" does not necessarily incapacitate someone. He could still be upright and moving around, just not as aware of what was going on. The defensive wounds could definitely come at that time as he lashed out blindly. I was surprised at the small number of defensive wounds, 4 or 5 I think. If you were fighting for your life, you would probably have many more if you were alert and unhampered. (Read about Collette Macdonalds defensive wounds).

No one believes Jodi's version, she is just trying to create a scenario where there could be a downward trajectory path, thus the linebacker pose.

Problem is the ME said Travis was not shot first regardless of what we might believe. The ME is the one who visits the scene, does the autopsy put the reports together and makes a determination. One of the reasons which is a strong one is that Travis was shot from approximately 2 foot away with a bullet that entered his temple and there is no bruising which would be expected from the impact of that bullet. Bruising appears around the entry wound when blood forms under the skin. That plus the fact that Travis' brain had very little blood which indicated he was possibility already dead when he was shot. That is pretty strong forensic evidence regardless of what we believe happened first. If he were shot first he would have been alive for at least another minute until he bled out which means there would have been bruising in that area of his head from the bullet. This is what the ME will, again, testify to if he is called for rebuttal which will throw a big wrench into the Jodi's story. We can go back and forth here but one of the last things the jury will probably hear on rebuttal is the ME saying it just did not happen the way Jodi said it did. She already knows her goose is cooked with that story. IMO, she is working on the jury to keep from getting the DP. jmo

The MEs do not generally visit the scene, they just do the autopsy. The Coroner goes to the scene and they may not even be medical doctors. Unless things are different in AZ.

Well 1st of all it is not possible for a bullet to "graze" through the skull. The skull is a thick bone and anything causing it's break and entry into the cranial cavity is a serious, serious medical condition. Grazing is the bullet going through superficial tissue only. A head injury including the cranial cavity is not a superficial injury.
Also even if it did not hit the brain it would have torn dura (the sac that encloses the brain) there are major venous supply on the outside of this dura that would have been ruptured. This would result in major bleeding even if the brain was not penetrated as the ME said it was. And if only vessels in the sinus cavity were ruptured there would be extensive bleeding the cranial cavity still. One of those vessels in the sinus cavity is the internal carotid artery... yep, your carotids. That would be lifethreatening in itself.

And simply because someone bled on a sink and mirror doesn't mean they were looking at themselves. He could have falling and caught himself on the sink or any number of speculations. People getting stabbed 29 times or shot in the head won't take the time to go look at themselves in the mirror when the stabber/shooter is still going at it.

The ME said in his autopsy report that the dura was intact:

http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/redactedtravisautopsy.pdf

"The dura mater and the falx cerebri are intact" - page 7

 

[LambChop]

You might be giving facts but then you are interpreting them. How you interpret them is your opinion. You can see that Dr. Baden disagrees with Dr. Horn using the same facts. I disagree with Dr. Horn using the same facts, for what it's worth [nothing]. Gun first or knife first is a matter of interpretation. And, if you just use the autopsy instead of the totality of facts in this case, you might arrive at the wrong interpretation.

This is a circumstantial case.

Juries don't like subtleties or inconsistencies or choices. They want everything cut and dried and handed to them on a silver platter. Otherwise, you might have reasonable doubt and I don't want to argue what reasonable doubt is but just to say it is a very high standard of proof.

JM is going to do what he's going to do. But, don't think he has this case sewn up, yet. He doesn't. We are not arguing about who killed him. She's admitted she killed him. We are arguing about why she killed him and why she killed him the way she did and that goes to what charge the Jury will finally settle on.

Aside from I don't believe knife first is what happened, it knocks the feet out from under premeditation. Haven't you heard people say that? Why would she steal a gun to kill him, file a police report, have it printed in the papers, drive 1000 miles with it, and then get into a knife fight with a bigger, stronger opponent when she gets there? I don't want you to answer that question, just think about it. Because that is the question the Jury will ask themselves if JM goes with knife first.

IMO

The ME has already testified and the stab wound first is what the jury is getting. This is what will stay with the jury when they go in for deliberations and what they will be instructed to consider as it is the only one of the two stories they have heard that fits the timeline. Jodi's version does not. And those are the only two available for the jury's consideration.

We all have to agree that the ME is far more credible than Jodi. The jury will be instructed that if they feel Jodi/witnesses are lying they may consider disregarding part or all of their testimony. JM has already nailed Jodi on the gas cans. There is more to come, we can see it by the line of questioning from JM. He's going to catch her on all her lies until there is nothing left for her to say that the jury will believe.

To the jury it really makes no difference whether or not she shot him first because everyone cannot get past her cutting his throat and the stab wounds in his back. To Jodi the shot first means everything, it's her whole case. To the State it's just another one of her lies that JM will catch her with.

Argue away but the ME's report stays as it is and will not change the outcome for the State and will only affect Jodi during sentencing. Jodi made the State's case for them when she cut his throat. Never a defensive move, nor are the 9 stabs wounds in the back. Just will not fly, ever. jmo

 

[wilsodh]

It doesn't matter what makes sense. You use scientific evidence to determine crime scenes. Not what the investigator would think would make sense. That's not how cases are done. There are many crime scenes that don't make sense at all and are still surprising after extensive analysis or even the criminal admitting what happened.

You've gotta be kidding. You don't think crime scene re-constructionists employ common sense? Physical evidence poses the possibility of different scenarios. Weighing the evidence requires judgement informed by experience and hopefully some knowledge of human behavior.

He could have came out of the shower and been standing in front of the sink before she started attacking. He could have been attacked and then fell towards the sink and JA continued the attack there. How do you know he was standing? The blood splatter expert said the blood was only low on the wall by the sink, a small amount was on the mirror but close to the sink ledge, so I don't know how you conclude that he was standing?

I think you are contorting to try and fit alternative scenarios into a scene that can be more simply explained by a scenario you are arguing against. Occam's Razor. Anybody looking at that sink and mirror would be hard pressed to conclude that the victim was a) not standing; b) not expirating blood; c) not facing the mirror. The diluted blood in front of the sink is most simply explained by the victim, with wet hands, propping himself up, facing the mirror.

BBM
So you guys are saying that if TA was stabbed 1st that he would not be able to make it over the sink? Pretty sure stabbing would make that possibility much higher than a shot to the head.

Alas, grasping at straws again with a scenario that just doesn't work without straining credulity. Why would a victim being attacked by a knife turn his back on the victim to face the mirror? If you are fighting for your life, 'fight or flight' adrenaline surging, you are trying to protect yourself and hopefully disarm the assailant.

The victim had a brief interval when he was not being attacked. He had just been shot in the head, the gun jammed, Jodi ran to retrieve the knife (perhaps in the bedroom), Travis was astonished, confused, hurt badly. He made his way to the mirror, coughed blood, and Jodi returned to finish the job.

The 'knife first' proponents really have only one thing to cling to to: Horn's opinion. I think we've seen from cited literature, at least one crime scene expert, and a first hand account from a member of this forum who worked emergency medicine, that a gunshot injury to the frontal lobe(s) of Travis' brain would not necessarily be incapacitating. Horn himself admitted that rapid decomposition of brain matter made it impossible to determine the path of the bullet through the brain tissue or extent of brain injury. I suspect the bleeding evidence was probably also weak and would not necessarily rule out a headshot first, as small caliber gunshot wounds may bleed heavily or may bleed lightly, depending on the location and nature of the damage to blood vessels. Alas, we'll never know now. But if that's all there is to 'prove' that the victim was shot last, it is hardly persuasive from everything I've heard and read. Gunshot first just makes so much more sense, on multiple levels.

I go back to Jodi's own words during the police interrogation tape. After recounting Travis being shot by the one of the Ninjas (before the gun jammed), she looks at the detective, and with a combination of surprise and disbelief, says "He was still alive!!"

I think that was a moment of authentic truth.

Dave

 

[LambChop]

I know! In her story alone, she admits to murder one. [[Although I'm sure her experts will say abused woman, yada, yada, yada]

So why mess with it and say, no, she's lying, it was knife first? And, looks more like self defense?

It's like both sides are arguing the wrong side.

IMO

It will only appear to be wrong if you are not willing to accept what is presented by the forensic evidence. As a juror you have to consider it as those are your instructions. You have to consider everything presented and not speculate. There are two sides. The State and Jodi's. Jodi's timeline does not compute at all to the 62 seconds we know it took for Travis to get to the end of that hallway. It's just not working for her. And that is all that really matters. jmo

 

[danzn16]

You've gotta be kidding. You don't think crime scene re-constructionists employ common sense? Physical evidence poses the possibility of different scenarios. Weighing the evidence requires judgement informed by experience and hopefully some knowledge of human behavior.

I think you are contorting to try and fit alternative scenarios into a scene that can be more simply explained by a scenario you are arguing against. Occam's Razor. Anybody looking at that sink and mirror would be hard pressed to conclude that the victim was a) not standing; b) not expirating blood; c) not facing the mirror. The diluted blood in front of the sink is most simply explained by the victim, with wet hands, propping himself up, facing the mirror.

Alas, grasping at straws again with a scenario that just doesn't work without straining credulity. Why would a victim being attacked by a knife turn his back on the victim to face the mirror? If you are fighting for your life, 'fight or flight' adrenaline surging, you are trying to protect yourself and hopefully disarm the assailant.

The victim had a brief interval when he was not being attacked. He had just been shot in the head, the gun jammed, Jodi ran to retrieve the knife (perhaps in the bedroom), Travis was astonished, confused, hurt badly. He made his way to the mirror, coughed blood, and Jodi returned to finish the job.

The 'knife first' proponents really have only one thing to cling to to: Horn's opinion. I think we've seen from cited literature, at least one crime scene expert, and a first hand account from a member of this forum who worked emergency medicine, that a gunshot injury to the frontal lobe(s) of Travis' brain would not necessarily be incapacitating. Horn himself admitted that rapid decomposition of brain matter made it impossible to determine the path of the bullet through the brain tissue or extent of brain injury. I suspect the bleeding evidence was probably also weak and would not necessarily rule out a headshot first, as small caliber gunshot wounds may bleed heavily or may bleed lightly, depending on the location and nature of the damage to blood vessels. Alas, we'll never know now. But if that's all there is to 'prove' that the victim was shot last, it is hardly persuasive from everything I've heard and read. Gunshot first just makes so much more sense, on multiple levels.

I go back to Jodi's own words during the police interrogation tape. After recounting Travis being shot by the one of the Ninjas (before the gun jammed), she looks at the detective, and with a combination of surprise and disbelief, says "He was still alive!!"

I think that was a moment of authentic truth.

Dave

LOL. That's literally all I can say anymore.

 

[LambChop]

The 'knife first' proponents really have only one thing to cling to to: Horn's opinion. I think we've seen from cited literature, at least one crime scene expert, and a first hand account from a member of this forum who worked emergency medicine, that a gunshot injury to the frontal lobe(s) of Travis' brain would not necessarily be incapacitating. Horn himself admitted that rapid decomposition of brain matter made it impossible to determine the path of the bullet through the brain tissue or extent of brain injury. I suspect the bleeding evidence was probably also weak and would not necessarily rule out a headshot first, as small caliber gunshot wounds may bleed heavily or may bleed lightly, depending on the location and nature of the damage to blood vessels. Alas, we'll never know now. But if that's all there is to 'prove' that the victim was shot last, it is hardly persuasive from everything I've heard and read. Gunshot first just makes so much more sense, on multiple levels.

I go back to Jodi's own words during the police interrogation tape. After recounting Travis being shot by the one of the Ninjas (before the gun jammed), she looks at the detective, and with a combination of surprise and disbelief, says "He was still alive!!"

I think that was a moment of authentic truth.

Dave

That exclamation by Jodi could have been made had she stabbed him in the chest as he exited the shower, too. To her it appears she stabbed him directly in the heart. In the end JM will present the timeline. The pictures do not lie and what killed him was not the bullet, first or last. It's the neck wound and that was not self defense in any way, shape or form. Not sure why the gunshot is being made to be so important when the issue is self defense and she had no time to run through the closet, climb up and get a gun that may or may not have been holstered, etc. So she is lying, plain and simple and we can't trust anything she says. jmo

 

[danzn16]

I know there was one doctor on HLN that agreed with gun first. There are posts in the beginning of this thread how her thought process on the topic makes absolutely no scientific sense and is just not possible. Actually go read her words. People slammed this theory that actually know anything about medicine, anatomy, and physiology. And I don't know if the name is dr Baden because when I google that with TA the only thing that comes up is posts from this thread. You won't believe the doc that actually saw TAs body and examined him, you say he is not an expert on brain damage so he shouldn't be talking about anything but yet you're with another pathologist who also isn't a brain damage expect that didn't even see TAs body at all? Well okay then. And I'm the one grasping at straws. Lmao

 

[pip]

Just because she is 3 inches shorter doesn't cause the knife wound to be in an upward manner, most woman slash in a downward manner, knife held above and brought down. Being shorter it would be in a lower part of the body. An upward knife wound indicates the knife was held lower and brought UP for the stabbing. Hard to describe what I'm trying to illustrate. Like I said, shower scene from Psycho, downward stabbing. Think of the crime shows where a guy goes up to someone and stabs from below, you don't see the knife swinging downward, it is an up thrust motion.

Being in "shock" does not necessarily incapacitate someone. He could still be upright and moving around, just not as aware of what was going on. The defensive wounds could definitely come at that time as he lashed out blindly. I was surprised at the small number of defensive wounds, 4 or 5 I think. If you were fighting for your life, you would probably have many more if you were alert and unhampered. (Read about Collette Macdonalds defensive wounds).

No one believes Jodi's version, she is just trying to create a scenario where there could be a downward trajectory path, thus the linebacker pose.



The MEs do not generally visit the scene, they just do the autopsy. The Coroner goes to the scene and they may not even be medical doctors. Unless things are different in AZ.



The ME said in his autopsy report that the dura was intact:

http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/redactedtravisautopsy.pdf

"The dura mater and the falx cerebri are intact" - page 7

The entire examination of the brain appears to conclude there is no evidence of brain injury. He then states that the gunshot injuries are to the skull and face. No mention of brain injury.

 

[Tipstaff]

Any men ever just sit down in the shower?

My thoughts are JA had the gun pointed at him and she instructed him to sit down in the shower - thus the look in TA's eyes in the picture.

Maybe TA picked up the camera to use to block JA when she brought out the knife - pictures were snapped. I would think that would infuriate JA and she became further enraged. Thus the overkill.

Premeditated murder by JA from long before she left California.

 

[LambChop]

The entire examination of the brain appears to conclude there is no evidence of brain injury. He then states that the gunshot injuries are to the skull and face. No mention of brain injury.

I believe the report reflects that other than the gunshot wound to his right temple the lining to the brain was intact. Travis did have some significant stab wounds to his skull. He had a bullet wound entry that passed through his brain so there had to have been a hole in the lining at that point of entry. This is so sad.

 

[pip]

I know! In her story alone, she admits to murder one. [[Although I'm sure her experts will say abused woman, yada, yada, yada]

So why mess with it and say, no, she's lying, it was knife first? And, looks more like self defense?

It's like both sides are arguing the wrong side.

IMO

I know! Right? This is the most mind boggling part of this case. You would think the defense would say that poor little Jodi had to act in self defense with a mere knife against BIG Travis (because she didn't have Grandpa's stolen .25 caliber) ...and the prosecutor would say gun first! She was in total control of him and had premeditated his demise when she stole Grandpas .25 caliber.

Bottom line is the defense has to explain the .25 caliber gun involved in her crime and they don't want it to be Grandpas gun. So they say it is Travis'. But why not say she defended herself with the knife first and then ran for the gun in his closet. That would make much more sense for her defense.

What is going on here. :waitasec: Why is it so backwards on both sides? What point are we missing?

 

[pip]

I believe the report reflects that other than the gunshot wound to his right temple the lining to the brain was intact. Travis did have some significant stab wounds to his skull. He had a bullet wound entry that passed through his brain so there had to have been a hole in the lining at that point of entry. This is so sad.

There is no evidence or conclusion in the autopsy report that the bullet passed thru his brain. In fact, his findings in the report tend to support the opposite. Then he gets on the stand and reports something entirely different than his written report concludes.

 

[pip]

I believe the report reflects that other than the gunshot wound to his right temple the lining to the brain was intact. Travis did have some significant stab wounds to his skull. He had a bullet wound entry that passed through his brain so there had to have been a hole in the lining at that point of entry. This is so sad.

And the GSW was not to his right temple. It was just above his right eyebrow. Frontal bone, not temporal bone. With a downward trajectory just above the right orbit with the bullet lodging into the left maxillary, it is actually hard to believe the bullet could have even come close to the brain.

 

[LambChop]

Any men ever just sit down in the shower?

My thoughts are JA had the gun pointed at him and she instructed him to sit down in the shower - thus the look in TA's eyes in the picture.

Maybe TA picked up the camera to use to block JA when she brought out the knife - pictures were snapped. I would think that would infuriate JA and she became further enraged. Thus the overkill.

Premeditated murder by JA from long before she left California.

I think she did have the gun on her. I think there is reason to believe she had both at the time he was sitting there in the shower. What I cannot believe is that Travis just let her shoot him (since he had had a gun pointed at his head in the past). I believe he would have tried to get the gun away from her because he knew he could.

Another possibility is that he stepped out of the shower as she claims and knocked the gun from her hand and she then used the knife to stab him in the chest. He could have stumbled to the sink to steady himself and she could have shot him there as he was leaning over spitting out blood. Remember she said he spit at her, then said or water (that bothered her because she remembers it vividly). It could have been blood while he was leaning on the sink. She would have recovered the gun on the floor and then shot him which would account for the bullet path. This could also account for the bullet landing on blood which would have been on the floor from his chest wound.

Mark my words, Jodi, we will figure it out. jmo

 

[LambChop]

And the GSW was not to his right temple. It was just above his right eyebrow. Frontal bone, not temporal bone. With a downward trajectory just above the right orbit with the bullet lodging into the left maxillary, it is actually hard to believe the bullet could have even come close the the brain.

Those are my words and you are correct. When I think of a gunshot to the head around the eyes I think temple for a description because that is the most graphic for an automatic visual, for me.

 

[LambChop]

There is no evidence or conclusion in the autopsy report that the bullet passed thru his brain. In fact, his findings in the report tend to support the opposite. Then he gets on the stand and reports something entirely different than his written report concludes.

Dr. Horn testified the bullet passed through the frontal lobe in court. It was under cross from defense. jmo