Jodi Arias; the sequence of events

[wilsodh]

Also I find it amusing that I see people saying their are pages and pages of articles in medical journals about people that survive frontal lobe gunshot wounds. Please link to these. Because they are considered a rarity and case reports would be written on them. But there are absolutely not pages and pages and pages. It's rare, therefore why it's written up in medical journals at all. .

Yum, a lot of red meat here. I hardy even know where to start. They are not written up because it is not at all uncommon! Editors would reject the paper as lacking interest! Given the time, I would dig into this post further, but I've spent too much time on this already and my wife is yelling at me to get off the computer. Perhaps another day.

Cheers

Dave

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Again, this proves nothing. Blood coagulates quickly, and the casing could have found its way on top of the blood at any time prior to Jodi leaving the scene.



My read of her reaction is that she is aggravated precisely because she knows the shooting came first, because she did shoot first. It irks her that Martinez has concocted a scenario that goes against both the actual facts as well as her carefully planned story to align with the facts as much as possible. She seethes that Martinez' scenario is both wrong and it will help convince the jury that she is lying!

Dave

Imo, she knows the gunshot came last but she must pretend in her selective memory fog that she has no memory of the slashing and dicing of Travis after then. She wants to diminish her role of the horrific slashing she did and to do that she has to say the shot came first and then she went into a convenient fog. She knows if she didnt pretend she didnt remember that Juan would have walked her through each and every stab wound she did along with the diabolical slashing of his throat before he got to the head wound which was last.

It irks her that Horn and JM do not agree with her babble and are right and onto her little game of cat and mouse. Sociopaths have great disdain for anyone who dares disagree with them or outs them. We have seen the facial features of JA when she knows she has been outted and she doesnt like it one bit. She is use to hiding behind the mask and lies.

If Im not mistaken one of the jury questions was about the casing ejecting on top of the blood and how could she explain that if the shot came first. She cant other than saying she disagrees with the sequence of events. It a very lame and rather predictable answer actually. Even she realizes now that it is the knife wounds that make her look diabolical and evil and the gunshot is more sterile and not as shocking. It took her two years to come up with this 'story' and it will not be bought by the jurors.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

This afternoon I watched the testimony of the medical examiner. Flores must have told the defense (or somehow they found out) that Travis was shot first. Dr. Horn said that he didn't tell Flores that the shot was first--that he doesn't even remember speaking to Flores, even though it is noted that Flores attended the autopsy. Dr. Horn thinks the gunshot probably came last. Travis could have already been dead when he was shot. After he was shot, Travis would have at least become incapacitated. He would not have been able to get up and fend off all the blows from the knife. Since the defense obviously thought Travis was shot first, I think Jodi started off her story with Travis lunging toward her and getting shot.

Horn was never even asked that question at all until he was deposed by the DT later on. It was when he was first asked about it that he answered truthfully and has never waivered. In fact he said he had never been asked that kind of question by anyone during his career as ME until the JA DT asked him. Because really in the end.......it doesnt matter and is still a heinous crime and a death penalty case either way.

It is ridiculous to me that Travis could have been shot in the brain by a bullet entering his head at 680 mps and just go on as nothing happened to him. Like Horn said when one part of the brain is affect the entire brain is affected since it all works in tandem.

There is no way in hell he would have been able to have defensive wounds if he had the shot to the brain first and he wouldnt have made it all the way down the hallway either.

She started off with the shot coming first because that way she didnt have to tell in detail all the stabbing she did to this poor man plus sliting his throat when he was very much alive.

That is nothing more than purposeful selective memory. She thinks it works for her but of course it will not and the jury will not believe on thing that comes out of her lying mouth. She lies and then she lies some more. She cant even tell an appropriate lie to support the lie she told early on.

Jodi Arias' is her own worst witness in her defense case.

IMO

 

[danzn16]

Yum, a lot of red meat here. I hardy even know where to start. They are not written up because it is not at all uncommon! Editors would reject the paper as lacking interest! Given the time, I would dig into this post further, but I've spent too much time on this already and my wife is yelling at me to get off the computer. Perhaps another day.

Cheers

Dave

But I thought you stated "medical literature are full of these cases"?? Now they're aren't written up because its boring and common?

I've never heard life after a gun shot to the head is common... Learning new things on WS everyday

 

[Zeno49]

FINALLY someone got it right! We may be outnumbered 2:1 in the voting, but I think this is the only sensible scenario given all the information we have.

I'm assuming most readers here have listened carefully to the police interrogation tape? There is a very telling point when Jodi describes Travis after he was shot by the 'intruder'. She says: "He was still alive!". The way she says this sends chills up my spine. She expressed a combination of surprise and emotion that was clearly genuine. This was the emotion she felt when she shot him in the shower. She fully expected a head shot would be immediate death. But it wasn't. She was very surprised when Travis was far from dead or incapacitated. She also indicated in the interrogation that the gun jammed. I think this was also an element of truth. Finally, if you'll recall, she describes that IF she were intending to kill Travis, she would do it humanely by shooting him until he was dead. She said this for two reasons: 1) this was her intent from the start when she brought the gun with her (which obviously she did); and 2) by describing this to the detective, she sets up a contrast with what the crime scene actually portrays. That is, why on god's green earth would she undertake to stab and butcher her ex when a gun would have been much cleaner and efficient?

So she expected Travis to die in the shower with a head shot while he was sitting down. The angle matches the bullet trajectory. But he doesn't die. She pulls the trigger again, and the gun jams. At that point she leaves the immediate scene to get the knife. Travis, stunned, stumbles to the sink, not knowing quite what to do. His sinus has been penetrated by the bullet, spilling blood into his mouth and lungs (as he breaths in through his nose, he aspirates blood). He coughs, and blood projects onto the mirror. Jodi returns with the knife, and starts trying to finish him off. He sees her in the mirror and turns to defend himself, acquiring defensive wounds. Mortally wounded and unable to stop the attack, he attempts to flee down the hall, where he falls and succumbs to additional stabs in the back and finally the throat slash. She is ferocious in her attack because she really wants him dead quickly, as the whole thing has turned from a carefully planned execution into a brutal nightmare. And she probably doesn't want him to suffer unnecessarily (as she indicated to the detective). What appears to be over-kill in cases like this is really just an attempt to end the life of the victim quickly. Stabbing rarely results in immediate death.

Ok, so what about Horn's testimony? Like the poster above, I was not at all persuaded by his suggestion that Travis would have been immediately incapacitated by the head shot. On what basis does he believe this? People often get shot in the head and don't go down immediately. It depends on what part of the brain is injured, the caliber of bullet, etc. The medical literature is full of cases of people with brain injuries who don't seem to be terribly affected by the injury. Sadly, suicides by gunshot to the head often fail to achieve the objective. This is particularly true of gunshots from the side into the temple. Some of us also seem to have forgotten that Horn stated that brain tissue degrades quickly upon death, and it was not possible for him to determine the extent of hemorrhaging. I'm frankly shocked that the defense let him get away with putting his scenario out there without vigorous cross examination and presenting an alternative scenario by expert witness. As this is a critical point in the trial, this mistake is huge.

For those who believe Jodi would have brought a gun as part of her plan, and yet bring upon herself all the mess, horror, and uncertainty of a knife attack as her first act of violence, I would recommend a careful re-listen to that police interrogation. There are haunting elements of truth to her story. Jodi was methodical. From the gas cans, to the staged robbery to get the gun, to all she did to try and cover her tracks. It makes absolutely no sense that she would have used a knife as the weapon of choice. She wanted a clean kill in the shower. Minimal mess, minimal DNA exposure to clean up. A scene of bloody mayhem is the last thing she would have wanted.

Dave

I have been arguing this scenario for over 6 weeks. We need not take as absolute TRUTH the ME's account of the clinical consequence of a right frontal lobe GSW. I do NOT believe the ME's opinion on this question. I am still awaiting input from an experienced trauma neurosurgeon who practices in large metropolitan areas ie Los Angeles, NYC, Miami, Chicago, or Atlanta where there are active "Knife and Gun Clubs"

I personally trained (neuroradiology) at LA County Medical Center (Los Angeles CA) and saw hundreds of GSW to head and neck.

Anybody believing in an alternative scenario needs to rebut the logic cogently explicated above.

 

[wasnt_me]

I still think she duct taped him in the shower.

 

[Zeno49]

I respectfully disagree. He has vast medical knowledge and also has hands on experience about all parts of the body including the brain throughtout his long career as a ME. Plus out of over 6,000 autopsies at the time this happened I am sure many of them were gunshot wounds to the brain.

Then why arent they refuting it if its so easy to do? We have heard of no pathologist being on the defense witness list.

I do not agree. If the casing was kicked around in that bloody bathroom it would have traces of blood all over it and even inside the empty casing cylinder instead of only underneath where it landed in the already spilled blood. The blood would continue to congeal after the casing landed there.

Nothing is over-weighed in a criminal murder cases. It was brought forth for a reason because it is evidence and the reason is it substantiates the gun shot was fired last and it backs up Dr. Horn's opinion which he has never waivered on.

The jury will know what it means when a casing is completely clean except the backside of it where it rested in the blood pool. Its really not complex to understand the casing/blood in this case. They dont live in caves nor are they from Pinellas Co. Florida either.

You are simply mistaken on Horn's competency. He is NOT a neuropathologist nor is he a neurosurgeon.No American doctor practicing in the 21st century has command of "vast medical knowledge". Typically a pathologist will spend some 4 + years in post graduate training. Pathology is like all other disciplines= sub specialized ie neuropathology, hemo/oncology pathology, forensics etc. His autopsy ( I think) report is of average quality at best. The account of GSW passing out of the skull into the left infratemporal fossa and masticator space is highly deficient.

If this case truly turned on "Gun shot first", the defense could find a trauma neurosurgeon to speak to the clinical outcomes of GSW to a single frontal lobe in which the bullet fragment enters the anterior aspect of frontal lobe ONLY.


Having said that though I agree that the casing on a pool of blood is powerful evidence.

BUT we know that JA spent a fair amount of time cleaning up, shoehorning a copse into the shower stall and altering the original crime scene. It is quite possible that the casing was disturbed either during the ensuing melee or during the "clean up" efforts.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Imo, she knows the gunshot came last but she must pretend in her selective memory fog that she has no memory of the slashing and dicing of Travis after then. She wants to diminish her role of the horrific slashing she did and to do that she has to say the shot came first and then she went into a convenient fog. She knows if she didnt pretend she didnt remember that Juan would have walked her through each and every stab wound she did along with the diabolical slashing of his throat before he got to the head wound which was last.

ITA, and notice that she even won't take responsibility for the gunshot. She says it went off by accident. She knew she had to testify to something about the killing for her self-defense claim, and so she chose to do the bare minimum.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

On what do you base the first sentence?

Well survival is common for a single lobe shot, but functioning will be very likely impaired.

Again, during her police interrogation tape (Ninja story), she describes the intruder (actually her) shooting Travis in the shower. Then she describes that the gun jammed (true), which is why the intruder didn't finish off Travis and her with the gun (partially true). The gun jammed. This is why the crime scene turned into murderous mayhem that no careful planner would want to have happen.

No, she only said the gun jammed when they were going to shoot her. She was just conjuring up for a story for how she survived. And it came off totally unbelievable.

We'll probably never know where she got the knife, if it was in the vicinity, if she planted it as a back up. She likely knew where it was in advance and didn't have to run to the kitchen for it. My guess is that it was in the bedroom, giving Travis time to get out of the shower and lean over the bathroom sink with a bleeding head wound.

No, this is doubtful. It's not likely someone would think to have a knife if they already have a gun.

Oh jeez. We have absolutely no way of knowing about the movements of a single .25 caliber shell casing on the floor during the commotion of a knife murder, moving of a body through the location of the shooting into the shower, and subsequent crime clean alteration by the perpetrator. This is probably the weakest evidence of the crime sequence in the trial!

No, it's simply more likely that a bullet found on top of blood landed there after the blood was deposited. It's POSSIBLE it happened some other way, but not as likely.

 

[Applejack]

His autopsy ( I think) report is of average quality at best.

What is this statement based on? It doesn't sound very confident.

He is not an expert in everything, no. But his job, in which he has numerous years' experience, is to determine cause of death and sequence of events. He accomplishes this both through direct observation but also crime scene reports and other expert reports.

A bullet is indeed different from any other object and causes a sort of shockwave effect. While it's possible to SURVIVE a gunshot wound to the head, the chances of being capable of chasing someone around a house and yelling coherent sentences is pretty much zero.

If there was a chance in hell of Jodi's version of events being true you can be assured the defense would have their own expert and would have been better prepared in questioning Dr Horn.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Education requirements to become a Medical Examiner.

4 years college
4 years medical school
4-7 year forensic pathology residency


http://www.innerbody.com/careers-in-health.html

 

[LambChop]

You are simply mistaken on Horn's competency. He is NOT a neuropathologist nor is he a neurosurgeon.No American doctor practicing in the 21st century has command of "vast medical knowledge". Typically a pathologist will spend some 4 + years in post graduate training. Pathology is like all other disciplines= sub specialized ie neuropathology, hemo/oncology pathology, forensics etc. His autopsy ( I think) report is of average quality at best. The account of GSW passing out of the skull into the left infratemporal fossa and masticator space is highly deficient.

If this case truly turned on "Gun shot first", the defense could find a trauma neurosurgeon to speak to the clinical outcomes of GSW to a single frontal lobe in which the bullet fragment enters the anterior aspect of frontal lobe ONLY.


Having said that though I agree that the casing on a pool of blood is powerful evidence.

BUT we know that JA spent a fair amount of time cleaning up, shoehorning a copse into the shower stall and altering the original crime scene. It is quite possible that the casing was disturbed either during the ensuing melee or during the "clean up" efforts.

Unlike some of us, I don't think the good doctor based his theory on the bullet casing to conclude that Travis was not shot first in the head. It seemed more as an after comment.

What is wrong with his report being average? Isn't that his job to report his findings? What more could anyone expect him to find given the circumstances? I believe he did his job and finished his report by reporting what he found. Unless there was something hidden that he did not find, I don't know how else anyone can judge the quality of his work. jmo

 

[hindsight2020]

I voted shot first intiallly, but now after I've heard/seen all the evidence, including JA testifony and heard the ME testimony again, I am not so sure.

I now think this sadistic woman stabbed Travis first, she wanted to hurt him, she wanted him to feel pain, she wanted him to suffer while he was still alive. I can hear her talking to him as she continually stabbed him.

Travis was in a vulnerable position in the shower/bath, maybe the shot was somewhere in between stabbings because spent cartridge was found in bathroom area, but I think the cut throat was last or next to last if indeed he was shot last.

In the grand scheme of things, as a juror I would accept the ME testimony, shot came last.

 

[LambChop]

I voted shot first intiallly, but now after I've heard/seen all the evidence, including JA testifony and heard the ME testimony again, I am not so sure.

I now think this sadistic woman stabbed Travis first, she wanted to hurt him, she wanted him to feel pain, she wanted him to suffer while he was still alive. I can hear her talking to him as she continually stabbed him.

Travis was in a vulnerable position in the shower/bath, maybe the shot was somewhere in between stabbings because spent cartridge was found in bathroom area, but I think the cut throat was last or next to last if indeed he was shot last.

In the grand scheme of things, as a juror I would accept the ME testimony, shot came last.

When we look at her with that slight grin on her face after testifying it assures us Jodi is truly sadistic. Flowers to the grandmother??? And all the other inappropriate behaviors leave us to believe she took great pleasure in killing Travis. jmo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Unlike some of us, I don't think the good doctor based his theory on the bullet casing to conclude that Travis was not shot first in the head. It seemed more as an after comment.

What is wrong with his report being average? Isn't that his job to report his findings? What more could anyone expect him to find given the circumstances? I believe he did his job and finished his report by reporting what he found. Unless there was something hidden that he did not find, I don't know how else anyone can judge the quality of his work. jmo

You are right, he had not seen the photo of the casing on top of blood nor the photo of Jodi's foot with Travis down on the floor bloody until he was testifying in the trial.

Yet, what it did do is support his original findings that the shot came last with Travis possibly being dead at the time or very near death when the shot was fired.

I thought his report was thorough and complete. I didnt find him inept in any manner. He is a medical examiner who has years of experience as a forensic pathologist and has done over 6,000 autopies.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I voted shot first intiallly, but now after I've heard/seen all the evidence, including JA testifony and heard the ME testimony again, I am not so sure.

I now think this sadistic woman stabbed Travis first, she wanted to hurt him, she wanted him to feel pain, she wanted him to suffer while he was still alive. I can hear her talking to him as she continually stabbed him.

Travis was in a vulnerable position in the shower/bath, maybe the shot was somewhere in between stabbings because spent cartridge was found in bathroom area, but I think the cut throat was last or next to last if indeed he was shot last.

In the grand scheme of things, as a juror I would accept the ME testimony, shot came last.

I think they have figured out Jodi by now and knows she is saying the shot came first only so she can fake having selective memory loss after then. That way she wont have to go into any detail about how she first stabbed him visciously before she finally put a bullet in his brain.

The gunshot coming first is just another concocted lie of JA and her thinking it makes her look better so she rearranges things to suit her best.

IMO

 

[AfterSunset]

I voted shot first intiallly, but now after I've heard/seen all the evidence, including JA testifony and heard the ME testimony again, I am not so sure.

I now think this sadistic woman stabbed Travis first, she wanted to hurt him, she wanted him to feel pain, she wanted him to suffer while he was still alive. I can hear her talking to him as she continually stabbed him.

Travis was in a vulnerable position in the shower/bath, maybe the shot was somewhere in between stabbings because spent cartridge was found in bathroom area, but I think the cut throat was last or next to last if indeed he was shot last.

In the grand scheme of things, as a juror I would accept the ME testimony, shot came last.

I pretty much agree with this theory. I keep going back and forth on gun first or stabbing first. But have to say I just can't grasp having a gun at my disposal, shooting (my victim) first, then picking up a knife to continue stabbing to death. The only way I could see gun first was if gun totally incapacitated (my victim). Then I could see continuing with knife (stab wounds) in complete and total rage. We do not see Travis totally incapacitated bc it's obvious there was a struggle in bathroom, down hallway towards bedroom then back to bathroom (shower).
I believe the stabbing a occur first, struggles, then the slicing of the neck. As she drags him back to shower area, his body makes involuntary movements and/or sounds making her believe he is still alive, so this is where she shoots him in the head to finalize his death. I do firmly believe that each stab wound was an act of rage for each time he rejected her. I totally agree with you about her talking to him as she brutally stabbed him....each and every time telling him "how dare you reject me after I have given you every thing you wanted and more" just MOO but I felt her rage when I looked at the photos...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Donnareit]

Cynthia Sommers was accused of poisoning her husband with arsenic. The defense brought in the world's expert on arsenic poisoning and he said that he knew it was a contamination problem in the lab because the samples shouldn't look like that. He said you would expect to see the same amount of arsenic in all the organs, not twice as much in the heart as in the liver, for instance. He also said the symptoms were not right.

Now this expert had been first retained by the State but when he disagreed with them, they dropped him, and the defense picked him up. In this case, the Jury sided with the ME over the expert and found her guilty. But, IIRC, the Judge ordered new testing of samples with another lab and lo and behold no arsenic was found at all. Her husband did not die of arsenic poisoning. It was lab contamination just like the expert said. So long story short, she was released from prison. Here's an example of where the Jury should not have blindly agreed with the ME.

In Jodi's case, like I said, I don't think it matters whether gun or knife first because I feel the prosecution has already proven premeditation. I just hope the Jury doesn't get hung up on it which is why I hope the Prosecutor points out to them that it doesn't matter and why. If anyone believes I am saying that gun first means she wins her case, that is not my feeling about it all. But, the Jury has to be confident in their decision, and, as we all know, this is a complicated case.

I agree with you, Molly. The elements of premeditation are overwhelming. The element of pain and suffering became moot when JA testified that Travis was conscious enough to say *ing kill you *****. However, if the Jury believes the stabbing came first, Jodi's entire defense falls apart. I think that is why the DT is so desperate to hang on with that sequence of events.

 

[Paige SC]

I am inclined to rely on the ME's testimony regarding the sequence. Not many folks are able to ambulate around once they've suffered a gunshot to the head. And I don't think it's of dire significance to establish the exact path the bullet took once it entered his skull in order to conclude it hit the frontal lobe causing immediate incapacitation. This is semantics. For anyone to assume he was shot first, you must not only believe he was capable of attempting to defend himself afterwards but that he was also capable of getting up from a sitting position and walking/crawling out the bathroom and down the hall. Anything is possible but not necessarily probable, IMHO.

 

[Captain86]

You are simply mistaken on Horn's competency. He is NOT a neuropathologist nor is he a neurosurgeon.No American doctor practicing in the 21st century has command of "vast medical knowledge". Typically a pathologist will spend some 4 + years in post graduate training. Pathology is like all other disciplines= sub specialized ie neuropathology, hemo/oncology pathology, forensics etc. His autopsy ( I think) report is of average quality at best. The account of GSW passing out of the skull into the left infratemporal fossa and masticator space is highly deficient.

If this case truly turned on "Gun shot first", the defense could find a trauma neurosurgeon to speak to the clinical outcomes of GSW to a single frontal lobe in which the bullet fragment enters the anterior aspect of frontal lobe ONLY.


Having said that though I agree that the casing on a pool of blood is powerful evidence.

BUT we know that JA spent a fair amount of time cleaning up, shoehorning a copse into the shower stall and altering the original crime scene. It is quite possible that the casing was disturbed either during the ensuing melee or during the "clean up" efforts.

Do you base this on professional experience or is it just an opinion?

He doesn't have to be a neuropathologist or neurosurgeon to determine whether there was intracranial bleeding or not. His testimony and opinion was that there was very little to no bleeding in the tissue of the Frontal Lobe. So, his opinion, supported by the evidence, is that he was shot after he had nearly bled out. This is consistent with the fact the the human body does whatever necessary to maintain blood flow to and function of the brain. If there was any blood left to go to the brain, then there would have been blood in the Frontal Lobe to be seen. Had the gunshot happened first, then their would have been easily recognizable intracranial bleeding. That is not what was seen medically by the ME.

My opinion on where the stabbing started is different from most. I don't believe that she stabbed him while he was in the shower. I maybe wrong, and it is hard to tell by some of the crime scene photos, but there does not appear to be enough splatter on the walls outside the shower, on the tub, or even up on the shower above the faucet. Why would he come out of the shower on her to then go to the sink and turn his back on the woman who had just stabbed him and was continuing to stab him? As evidenced by the smears on the hallway walls, he was trying to get out of that bathroom. He may have been trying to get to the stairs, but that is just speculation on my part. For some reason, I think he was at the sink when she first stabbed him. She got him turn around, she possibly stabbed low (in the stomach) to get that first quick jab in. He grabbed at the knife, got his hands cuts, but then covered the wound in the stomach, but left his chest open to her. She stabbed again, and he goes into the get the heck away from her mode. He turns toward the sink, coughs blood everywhere and is bleeding fromt eh chest wounds. She then gets a couple in on the back and he starts down the hallway. He is in pain and shock and runs into the right hand wall, with her right behind him stabbing away. At some point (down near the carpet), he turned to try and fight. He eventually got to the carpet where she cut hit throat. I believe the shot came after this. He lost a lot of blood on the carpet. She pulled him back down the hall, at some point (probably near the shower) he has had some involuntary spasm and she thought he was trying to get up or was still alive, so she shot him. He had very little blood left in his body and she had severed the main supply lines to the brain, so there wasn't much blood to bleed into the brain where the bullet passed.

Just my thoughts on how it could have went down, but he was shot last no matter what actually happened.