Jodi Arias; the sequence of events

[Wolfpack Fan]

Does anybody have a link to the Dr. Michael Baden comments about the sequence of events? I trust his opinion (except on cases in which his wife is involved). I had not seen him on any programs.

 

[pip]

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

He does not say that in his report. Yes, the bullet passed thru the frontal BONE, (above his right eyebrow), downward thru the sinus cavity (common sense, anatomically speaking) and lodged into his left maxillary. This does not mean it passed thru the frontal lobe of his brain. No injury noted in his autopsy report, dura intact. He states injuries are to the skull (not brain) and face.
He would have been stunned, in shock, in pain, bleeding profusely out the nose and mouth, even likely had right eye visual disturbance...but NO brain injury IMO. He got out of that shower and stumbled to the sink/mirror because of his traumatic facial injuries.

Her aim was off, as he turned away... she shot him in the face.

 

[LambChop]

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?

It isn't. The State is committed to the ME's report. Defense is committed to the story Jodi has stated to Flores that the gunshot was first. It also fits nicely with her story that she was traumatized by the gunshot and does not remember brutally stabbing Travis to death as if she uncontrollably killed him under some type of fog that suddenly rolled in. That is her whole case. If the ME said it never happened that way, Jodi is toast. Her whole story falls apart and what is left for the jury to decide is what the State tells them what really happened or what likely happened from the forensic evidence they gathered from the scene.

We know Jodi did not hold the gun to his head because the shot came from two foot way. If he was lunging toward her with her arms outstretched and the gun went off the bullet track would have been front to back, not from the side and slightly behind him pointing down.

I do think he knocked her down getting out of the shower because she had the gun and she could have lost the gun. She could have had put the knife down on the tub and grabbed it when she fell and then stabbed him as she was getting up. The possibilities are endless.

What we do know is he made it to the sink because of the blood. He was wounded then and may have needed to go to the sink to steady himself or if he were down to help get himself up if she were stabbing him. It is such a short period of time until he reached the end of the hallway and she had to have been stabbing at him the whole time.

Also the stab to the chest came while he was in the shower area because there was blood splatter on the toilet which was opposite the tub in a walled off room. That was from blood being projected a distance from where it originated so it appears Travis was in the area of the shower when he was first stabbed.

In the end we know Jodi killed him, she is just trying to save her life with her story. It is the only purpose for her telling the jury she stabbed him first whether it's the truth or not. She's doing damage control, it's that simple.

Watching the new footage from her arrest video one has to wonder was she singing that song to him while he was in the shower right before she killed him.

That song tells us she remembers everything then and now. She's about to be arrested and she knows it and she sings that haunting song. jmo

 

[LambChop]

He does not say that in his report. Yes, the bullet passed thru the frontal BONE, (above his right eyebrow), downward thru the sinus cavity (common sense, anatomically speaking) and lodged into his left maxillary. This does not mean it passed thru the frontal lobe of his brain. No injury noted in his autopsy report, dura intact. He states injuries are to the skull (not brain) and face.
He would have been stunned, in shock, in pain, bleeding profusely out the nose and mouth, even likely had right eye visual disturbance...but NO brain injury IMO. He got out of that shower and stumbled to the sink/mirror because of his traumatic facial injuries.

Her aim was off, as he turned away... she shot him in the face.

That is not what Dr. Horn testified to. He told JW the bullet did pass through the frontal lobe. If you go up to the timeline thread you will hear under cross the argument he had with JW about it. She kept insisting it did not penetrate the skull and travel though the frontal lobe and he said it did, in fact, do that and traveled through a portion of the frontal lobe. There was also an x-ray which clearly shows how the bullet would have traveled. Dr. Horn was quite aggravated with JW trying to twist what was in his report. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Does anybody have a link to the Dr. Michael Baden comments about the sequence of events? I trust his opinion (except on cases in which his wife is involved). I had not seen him on any programs.

I don't believe we have seen any links just comments that Dr. Baden had an opinion. jmo

 

[pip]

That is not what Dr. Horn testified to. He told JW the bullet did pass through the frontal lobe. If you go up to the timeline thread you will hear under cross the argument he had with JW about it. She kept insisting it did not penetrate the skull and travel though the frontal lobe and he said it did, in fact, do that and traveled through a portion of the frontal lobe. There was also an x-ray which clearly shows how the bullet would have traveled. Dr. Horn was quite aggravated with JW trying to twist what was in his report. jmo

His written report is in complete contradiction to his verbal testimony. Night and day. I believe the written report findings at the time of autopsy.

 

[LambChop]

His written report is in complete contradiction to his verbal testimony. Night and day. I believe the written report findings at the time of autopsy.

This is the cross starting at 29:00.

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

 

[Wolfpack Fan]

I didn't hear Dr. Horn's testimony until I watched it on YouTube last weekend. One thing I remember is that he did say that Travis's brain had liquified by the time of the autopsy. JW told him that he was able to cut slices of the brain to test. He looked back at his report and saw that he had. The brain had to have been at least solid enough for him to make those slices. I don't think this makes any difference concerning a verdict of first-degree murder, but it looks bad when Flores and Horn have conflicting testimony. It does make me think that Dr. Horn DID tell Flores that the gun was used first.

 

[teledude]

I come at this from a different perspective.

I have been a gun and shooting enthusiast most of my life. Read thousands of gun magazines and articles about different guns and calibers. I have shot many different types of guns. I am no expert, but I am very familiar with guns and how they work and what they can do.

One thing all these articles I've read talk about is using a large enough caliber of gun to "stop" an assailant if you need to shoot someone for self defense.

Many studies have been done on the effects of various pistol cartridges and how effective they actually are in "stopping power"

The tiny .25 caliber is usually considered the weakest round in production. It has less velocity than a .22, which is more commonly used for plinking at cans and hunting small game like squirrels, rabbits, etc (although they can be fatal to humans, just usually not instantly so.)

A .25 does not have enough power to give the hydrostatic shock that larger rounds do. This shock is what causes people to loose consciousness when shot.

It is very conceivable that Travis could have stumbled from the shower to the sink after being shot in the forehead. The bullet trajectory fits this scenario.

Also, semi- automatics like the .25 are notorious for jamming when being shot by someone unfamiliar with guns. They need to be held very firm for the action to cycle the next round into the chamber, and many first timers will "weak wrist" it by holding too loosely. The result is a jammed gun that will not fire.

So I can easily envision Jodi getting him to pose sitting in the shower, then pulling the gun and firing at his head. It is natural to duck your head if you see a gun or even a fist coming at it - just as Jodi fires he tucks his head , tilting it forward and the bullet travel through his sinus and ends up in his cheek.

Now the panic sets in. Travis is flopping around, trying to stand, probably screaming and cursing as she frantically tries to pull the trigger - it won't work!!

She decides to go for the knife, which she probably had with her (the tire slasher) not a kitchen knife. By the time she turns around with a knife Travis has made it to the sink.

She starts stabbing him in the head and back. He turns to try an ward her off but she keeps stabbing. He tries to escape down the hall but he goes down, probably with his heart pierced by now. He still keeps trying to get away on all fours. Jodi jumps him and slits his throat at the end of the hall and he is down for good.

Now what about the bullet casing on top of the blood?

I believe that pooling blood could have easily welled up under the casing, kind of 'floating the boat'. Or it is also possible the bullet casing originally landed on the sink counter and Jodi knocked it on to the floor as she was frantically trying to clean up.

It's possible.

The reason I think this is probably how it happened is because of the gunshot. After practically butchering him I see no reason to switch weapons to shoot him after he is dead. I understand some speculate his body involuntarily twitched or made a sound so she wanted to finish him off. I just think she would have used the knife she'd already used so much.

But a jammed gun would explain using two weapons.
And a jammed gun is very common in a situation like this.

The bullet trajectory fits the scene.
The aspirated blood on the sink fits this scenario as well.

Why, if she stabbed him in the heart first, did she allow him to get to the sink- wouldn't she be still stabbing as he got up? And if so, wouldn't Travis try to get away down the hall- not stop at the sink to look at his wounds?

The brain was too decomposed to see if it had been damaged by the bullet. But a .25 is not powerful enough to give any hydrostatic shock, the bullet is traveling too slow. Travis was a strong healthy young man, I think he could have still been conscious, perhaps stunned, but able to get up and go to the sink with that gunshot injury.

I believe the blood spatter at the sink supports the gunshot first scenario. The different blood patterns, drips, aspirated, smears, all support him standing at the sink, if only briefly.

I just don't see him doing that after the stabbing starts. At that point I think he is fighting for his life to get away.

Ultimately I do not think it should matter. Whether she shot him or stabbed him first, the evidence shows she brutally killed him in a cruel, premeditated way and deserves to be found guilty of first degree murder.

 

[thelmadawg]

If you look at an enhanced (brightened) picture of TA sitting in the shower, there appears to be a pool of blood beneath his bottocks area.


Has this been noticed and commented on? There does not appear to be any injuries at this point to his chest area. So, perhaps, a back stab first?

 

[molly333]

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

well, this is my biggest fear at this point--that the Jury will think they have to decide between the State and knife first or Jodi and gun first.

This is what I keep saying ad nauseum--I am on the side of the State but with the gun first. And, what's more, that's the only way I can get to premeditated murder.

In other words, I think she stole the gun, drove with it 1000 miles, and shot him in the shower with the intent to kill. But, to hold this position, I have to fight with 2/3 of the 'Jury'[this thread] which says State, knife first.

So what am I going to do? If I am beaten into accepting knife first, then I cannot go with premeditation, because then the reasonable deduction is that she got into a fight with Travis, grabbed the knife off the counter to defend herself, and won the fight by luck. Then I have to decide for myself whether this is second degree, manslaughter, or self defense.

The gun becomes irrelevant if it was used last. And, so does premeditation.

IMO

 

[LambChop]

If you look at an enhanced (brightened) picture of TA sitting in the shower, there appears to be a pool of blood beneath his bottocks area.


Has this been noticed and commented on? There does not appear to be any injuries at this point to his chest area. So, perhaps, a back stab first?

It's the drain for the shower.

 

[teledude]

If you look at an enhanced (brightened) picture of TA sitting in the shower, there appears to be a pool of blood beneath his bottocks area.


Has this been noticed and commented on? There does not appear to be any injuries at this point to his chest area. So, perhaps, a back stab first?

I thought that at first but on closer inspection that is the drain

 

[pip]

I see what you are saying. I guess knife first could deduct premeditation from the equation.. I can certainly see how knife vs. gun first could be the dividing issue among the jurors. I predict they will all agree that it was murder, not in self defense, but will have differring opinions in the gun vs. knife issue. How will they reconcile that as a group to form a unanimous verdict? Will this hang the jury?

 

[teledude]

I hope that Juan argues in his closing that in the end, the sequence of the wounds is irrelevant.

There is no evidence supporting Jodi's claim of self defense and tons pointing to premeditation.

It was a brutal, painful murder in which Travis suffered terribly.

I'm in the shooting first camp due to the blood spatter on the sink, bullet trajectory, location of the spent shell casing, logic of using a second weapon, and my knowledge of semi-auto pistols and their propensity to jam.

But either way she's guilty.

 

[molly333]

I see what you are saying. I guess knife first could deduct premeditation from the equation.. I can certainly see how knife vs. gun first could be the dividing issue among the jurors. I predict they will all agree that it was murder, not in self defense, but will have differring opinions in the gun vs. knife issue. How will they reconcile that as a group to form a unanimous verdict? Will this hang the jury?

It could. It could hang the Jury. Or it could bring in one of the lessor includeds--which don't exist right now, but I think will be added before the case goes to the Jury.

The Jury might not like Jodi very much right now but once they get back to that Jury room and look at what they have to work with, they are going to have the same problems with it we have had on this thread. Unless something changes, that is--the trial isn't over yet.

I love your posts, by the way. "She shot him in the face"--that's exactly what happened.

IMO

 

[LambChop]

well, this is my biggest fear at this point--that the Jury will think they have to decide between the State and knife first or Jodi and gun first.

This is what I keep saying ad nauseum--I am on the side of the State but with the gun first. And, what's more, that's the only way I can get to premeditated murder.

In other words, I think she stole the gun, drove with it 1000 miles, and shot him in the shower with the intent to kill. But, to hold this position, I have to fight with 2/3 of the 'Jury'[this thread] which says State, knife first.

So what am I going to do? If I am beaten into accepting knife first, then I cannot go with premeditation, because then the reasonable deduction is that she got into a fight with Travis, grabbed the knife off the counter to defend herself, and won the fight by luck. Then I have to decide for myself whether this is second degree, manslaughter, or self defense.

The gun becomes irrelevant if it was used last. And, so does premeditation.

IMO

The cutting of the throat is premeditation. The 9 stab wounds to the back are premeditation. The going after the knife if she claims she did not have it and did not know where it was located is premeditation. There is more reason to believe she deliberately killed him than not. She knows the State has her on the premed. She's just grabbing at straws to keep them from sentencing her to death.

From what we can see defense is through with the events according to Jodi. Mr. Samuels is mitigating why she can't remember and why she should be spared the DP. His testimony normally would be after she was found guilty. The defense has nothing to back up her testimony other than two experts who will try and turn down the heat on the burner.

It bothers us here because it seems logical the shot came first and along comes the ME saying, whoa, no, it did not. I agree if it were not for the ME I would agree too the shot came first. But the only reason for proving it did not for the State is that Jodi is lying, again. The shot was not at the time of Travis' death a fatal injury. What killed him was massive loss of blood from the stab to the chest and having his throat cut. All other wounds were potentially survivable. Jodi did not stop until he was dead. That is the issue for the jury. That is what they will consider. She did not stop and in 62 seconds continually stabbed him when she clearly had a chance to get away from him and call 911.

Something else that is telling is that Jodi started at the shower (we know that) and when she finished stabbing him she drug him back to the shower because that was her plan. He had already taken a shower so her DNA was off him. If it was self defense she would have wanted to get away not drag him back to where she said he originally attacked her. In her fog she would have wanted to get as far away from him as possible. The effort in dragging him back to the shower smacks of pre-planning. During an attack instinct tells you fight or flight. Fighting would immediately lead to flight if your attacker was down unless you were an experienced fighter trained in combat. If she truly loved him, attacking her or not, she would have called 911 once he was down if it were self defense. jmo

 

[molly333]

You don't necessarily get to murder one from the knife wounds. Most of those wounds were superficial. Only two were fatal.

The wound to the SVC would not have stopped him immediately, so she would not know the seriousness of the wound. Cutting his throat could be construed as coming from terror, panic, and just trying to stop him rather than from a logical, premeditated thought to kill him.

If he is attacking her, she is just trying to defend herself.

There was a similar case a while ago. Two guys jump one guy and have him on the ground, one punching him and one kicking him in the head. He pulls out a knife and stabs the one over him creating a wound to the heart which the guy will later die from. They run away in the car when he's stabbed and he is dead by the time they get him to the hospital.

The guy who stabbed him walked home, threw the knife away, hid his clothes. I think he may have called 911 anonymously before he left the scene but everyone was gone by the time the police got there.

State asked for murder one. The jury came in with a lessor charge. It was overturned on appeal. Second jury was hung. State finally pleaded out to manslaughter, I think.

 

[LambChop]

I see what you are saying. I guess knife first could deduct premeditation from the equation.. I can certainly see how knife vs. gun first could be the dividing issue among the jurors. I predict they will all agree that it was murder, not in self defense, but will have differring opinions in the gun vs. knife issue. How will they reconcile that as a group to form a unanimous verdict? Will this hang the jury?

I do not think it will hang the jury because I think JM will address this issue in his closing argument. It appears he is trying to discredit her accounting by lining up each lie individually to show the jury there is a pattern to her lies to cover her premeditation. He only has to discredit her with a few of the ones that she swears to that will knock her story out of the park for the jury. She is self-serving and her lies will reflect that. My guess is during deliberations the jury will disregard anything she has stated and look at what the State presented as facts to determine if it were premeditated. For me, Juan has already proved that way beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt.

She lied about seeing TA around 3pm in the afternoon when she claims she saw him with the pictures on his computer. There is no evidence of pictures in his home or on his computer. Jodi was working at that time and did not get off until 5pm. She lied and JM caught her. JM caught her with the return of the gas cans. Jodi lies and is not the least concerned whether or not it can be proven to be a lie.

I don't think we are giving the jury enough credit. jmo

 

[pip]

I see what you are saying. I guess knife first could deduct premeditation from the equation.. I can certainly see how knife vs. gun first could be the dividing issue among the jurors. I predict they will all agree that it was murder, not in self defense, but will have differring opinions in the gun vs. knife issue. How will they reconcile that as a group to form a unanimous verdict? Will this hang the jury?

Love your posts too! I am so confused as to why Juan has to go with the knife first theory. Why why why? It just doesn't make any sense that I can put an Oh! AHA! I get it! to. It just seems bass ackwards. I can see this becoming a sticky point. I bet you are right that lessers will be brought in.

In the ME testimony on the stand when defense is questioning him about the GSW...this is what I am seeing:
He looks afraid/nervous.
He looks sullen.
Not at all confident.
He looks irritated.
He acts defensive.
He uses the "I don't recall, can't remember" line a bit too much.
He gives a completely different version of the original written report.

He acts like he has a pony in this race instead of an unbiased forensic data collector, which he should be.

Meanwhile, pan to Flores, no expression..sort of a gameface look.

The defense seems to know another truth that she can't draw out of him or pin him to.

I think the ME is uncomfortable, worried and resentful about the position he finds himself in.

I believe he did tell Flores the GSW came first.

JMO.