Jodi Arias; the sequence of events

[danzn16]

There are a lot of ridiculous statements in your post, but let me try to work through them.

It is clear that you did not watch the Furhman interview that is embedded in post #591. Dr. Baden did not appear in the interview. Instead, Fuhrman was just quoting his findings.

Furthermore, even if Dr. Baden is being paid in his capacity as a consultant for Fox, that in no way undermines his credibility. He has appeared in many television shows in the past and made unbiased determinations, even solving previously unsolved crimes.

Dr. Baden did not examine the body, but he certainly reviewed the ME's final report in this case. Are you saying that the ME's report was not complete? In other words, is the ME basing his testimony on facts that were not contained in the final report? If so, the ME is being inconsistent with his final report. If not, then Dr. Baden is at least as qualified, if not more qualified, than the ME to weigh in on what he views to be the sequence of events in this case.

Dr. Baden is looking at the same facts as the ME, but he disagrees with the ME as to the sequence of events. He thinks JA shot TA first and then retrieved the knife to finish him off.

I did watch the interview already. I was asking where are we getting that other than a quote from a different person. Second hand information is not acceptable.

Also he didn't quote his findings like that pathlogist examined TA. He said only that pathologist believed that shot came first.

I can't say anything about Baden's opinion because we don't even know if it is his opinion because we don't have that straight from him.

But this pathologist is not the same as the HLN one that I was speaking of.

 

[molly333]

But JM is not arguing the gun came first. That was the statement from the ME. What he is doing is trying to prove that if Jodi did shoot Travis first she had to make the decision to get the knife to finish killing him. He is poking holes in her story to the jury that after she initially shot him she had an opportunity to get away because Travis did not have the knife and she admits to not knowing where it was. From her own testimony she is saying she had to LOOK for the knife in order to finish killing him. Whether she admits it or not because of a fog. It is a fact. Premeditation. Plain and simple. Does not matter to JM if she shot him first or stabbed him. At some point she changed weapons and that is premeditation. Slam dunk. jmo

Not necessarily if knife is used first. At the end, she could have come to her senses after she slit his throat and thought, OMG he's suffering and shot him to end his suffering, with the gun that she didn't use first because it was not premeditated murder.

IMO

 

[LambChop]

Aha. The bottom line is that Juan was dealt a freak circumstance that he had to deal with. It could be a confusing jury splitter.
The bullet casing on the blood.
Blows away the 'shot in the shower first' scenario if he cannot convince the jurors that it landed there during the melee or clean up efforts. (Which I 100% believe it obviously did). He decided to take the low road and go with the knife first scenario because of that damn bullet casing. He picked his battle upon weighing the odds.
The bullet casing on the blood... an unfortunate freak event that it secondarily came to rest there. It screwed Juan from going with the actual sequence of events.

The only issue is her story not the sequence at this point. The jury is beyond that and focused on how did she have time to run to the closet, grab the gun that may or may not have been in the holster, run into the bathroom, shoot Travis while falling again on the tile floor and then manage to stab him 27 times and cut his throat while he was clearly trying to get away from her. All this in 62 seconds. She did stab him in the bathroom. He did go down the hallway away from her because if he were chasing her she would have had blood on her feet and there would have been prints beyond where his throat was cut to the outside door. No prints in the closet and none past the end of hallway. Her bloody handprint on the wall.

Juan will let her hang herself. It's not important which came first if the jury believes she was lying that all this happened in 62 seconds. We know by their questions to her they are not buying it. The lies are the States saving grace in this case. If she is not to be believed her testimony will mean nothing in deliberations. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Not necessarily if knife is used first. At the end, she could have come to her senses after she slit his throat and thought, OMG he's suffering and shot him to end his suffering, with the gun that she didn't use first because it was not premeditated murder.

IMO

She cut his throat, 9 stab wounds to the back. There is nothing more premeditated than that. Once he is no longer a danger and she has a choice to get away and she decides to go ahead and kill him anyway it is premeditation whether the State is able to prove she planned it or not. Jodi does not get to play God as an excuse for killing him. jmo

 

[molly333]

The only issue is her story not the sequence at this point. The jury is beyond that and focused on how did she have time to run to the closet, grab the gun that may or may not have been in the holster, run into the bathroom, shoot Travis while falling again on the tile floor and then manage to stab him 27 times and cut his throat while he was clearly trying to get away from her. All this in 62 seconds. She did stab him in the bathroom. He did go down the hallway away from her because if he were chasing her she would have had blood on her feet and there would have been prints beyond where his throat was cut to the outside door. No prints in the closet and none past the end of hallway. Her bloody handprint on the wall.

Juan will let her hang herself. It's not important which came first if the jury believes she was lying that all this happened in 62 seconds. We know by their questions to her they are not buying it. The lies are the States saving grace in this case. If she is not to be believed her testimony will mean nothing in deliberations. jmo

The problem with Jodi is that she has proven to me that she will lie even if it's in her own best interests to tell the truth.

So I have thrown out all of her testimony.

Now, I have to figure out on my own from the evidence what happened.

Being a pathological liar is not evidence for murder one.

IMO

 

[RealityMan]

JM did not select it. The ME did.

Maybe. If so, JM had to go with that theory. I wonder if JM had some influence over the ME, though, at least in terms of exactly how the ME expressed his views on the stand.

 

[pip]

The only issue is her story not the sequence at this point. The jury is beyond that and focused on how did she have time to run to the closet, grab the gun that may or may not have been in the holster, run into the bathroom, shoot Travis while falling again on the tile floor and then manage to stab him 27 times and cut his throat while he was clearly trying to get away from her. All this in 62 seconds. She did stab him in the bathroom. He did go down the hallway away from her because if he were chasing her she would have had blood on her feet and there would have been prints beyond where his throat was cut to the outside door. No prints in the closet and none past the end of hallway. Her bloody handprint on the wall.

Juan will let her hang herself. It's not important which came first if the jury believes she was lying that all this happened in 62 seconds. We know by their questions to her they are not buying it. The lies are the States saving grace in this case. If she is not to be believed her testimony will mean nothing in deliberations. jmo

Let's hope you are right!

 

[pip]

Maybe. If so, JM had to go with that theory. I wonder if JM had some influence over the ME, though, at least in terms of exactly how the ME expressed his views on the stand.

He probably went to the ME and said you have no business concluding that the GSW came first because of the casing found on the blood at the scene... Juan decided to go with the knife first theory because of that damn (displaced) casing so he made the ME take back his gun first statement based on that evidence at the scene. So... ME took it back. Knife first. I think ME knows it was gun first but has to say knife first because of the casing being found on blood.

 

[molly333]

She cut his throat, 9 stab wounds to the back. There is nothing more premeditated than that. Once he is no longer a danger and she has a choice to get away and she decides to go ahead and kill him anyway it is premeditation whether the State is able to prove she planned it or not. Jodi does not get to play God as an excuse for killing him. jmo

Or, at some point you are in a crazed state of mind if survival is at stake. You are not thinking rationally.

It can play both ways. That's why it is so important to prove premeditation, which is, planning the killing beforehand, no matter what Nancy Grace says.

IMO

 

[LambChop]

Let's hope you are right!

I have faith in JM. He has already proven to me she's lying to fit the evidence. Interesting to see her on the stand and listen to Nurmi lead her (with his "leading" questions) in one direction only to be cut off by her and she clearly changes what she was suppose to say because she believes she knows best how to handle this jury. Totally shoots herself in the foot. If we can see it, the jury can see it.

I love the story of the last time Travis chased her down the hallway from the bathroom when he was angry and he grabs her wrists and turns her around and hugs her. She went totally off the track with that one. She was suppose to say he hurt her, IMO. But she liked her version better. No reason to think he would have hurt her when she dropped the camera. She had no idea if he picked up the camera or not just assumed he would kill her because she was acting like a 5 year-old. If Travis wanted to kill her and it was his gun wouldn't he have grabbed his gun first. He was right there with the door wide open. Her story makes no sense and does not go along with what the evidence shows. She is grabbing at straws. jmo

 

[LambChop]

Or, at some point you are in a crazed state of mind if survival is at stake. You are not thinking rationally.

It can play both ways. That's why it is so important to prove premeditation, which is, planning the killing beforehand, no matter what Nancy Grace says.

IMO

LOL. When have we ever seen Nancy on the stand as an expert witness. I think we all do a much better job at research on WS's than any of her staff. We could all take turns reporting every night on what happened in court and it would be truthful. NG is entertainment, period. I like her sometimes but I do not watch her any more because I hate the misinformation put out to the public on her show. jmo

 

[pip]

I have faith in JM. He has already proven to me she's lying to fit the evidence. Interesting to see her on the stand and listen to Nurmi lead her (with his "leading" questions) in one direction only to be cut off by her and she clearly changes what she was suppose to say because she believes she knows best how to handle this jury. Totally shoots herself in the foot. If we can see it, the jury can see it.

I love the story of the last time Travis chased her down the hallway from the bathroom when he was angry and he grabs her wrists and turns her around and hugs her. She went totally off the track with that one. She was suppose to say he hurt her, IMO. But she liked her version better. No reason to think he would have hurt her when she dropped the camera. She had no idea if he picked up the camera or not just assumed he would kill her because she was acting like a 5 year-old. If Travis wanted to kill her and it was his gun wouldn't he have grabbed his gun first. He was right there with the door wide open. Her story makes no sense and does not go along with what the evidence shows. She is grabbing at straws. jmo

Even if the jurors know she is a liar, hate her, and throw all of her testimony out the window...they still have to deliberate with the evidence at hand and decide if it was premeditated 1st degree or less. They have to follow the rules in deliberating a verdict, despite how they feel about her. There are some grey areas they will have to come to terms with. Much of it is circumstantial evidence that it was premeditated. I hope they can do the math on just how overwhelming the circumstantial evidence is in this case better than in the CA trial!

 

[LambChop]

He probably went to the ME and said you have no business concluding that the GSW came first because of the casing found on the blood at the scene... Juan decided to go with the knife first theory because of that damn (displaced) casing so he made the ME take back his gun first statement based on that evidence at the scene. So... ME took it back. Knife first. I think ME knows it was gun first but has to say knife first because of the casing being found on blood.

In today's world an ME is not about to compromise. He gave his opinion based on his findings. He's done regardless of what the State feels happened. The ME has to testify because he is the one who did the report. Defense needs him to agree the shot was first and he will not do so because that is not his belief. He will not compromise. In the end it does not matter either way to JM. JM is more concerned that the story Jodi is telling is not consistent with the facts and that she is lying. It is his job to prove Jodi's story is again, just another lie to protect herself from the DP. I do not think defense is trying to disprove she cut Travis' throat, only that she was in a fog and therefore the death penalty should not be considered.

From the blood evidence at the sink (massive blood loss) where it appears he was either standing or kneeling, it proves she could have left the scene at that time. She did not do that but continued to stab him every 1 to 1 1/2 seconds after that finally ending by cutting his throat. It leaves no time for her to stop and evaluate, focus, whatever on getting away. Her intent with those actions are not to flee but to stay there follow him down the hall as he crawls (her description to Flores) and finish him off at the end of the hallway. That is murder 1. jmo

 

[pip]

In today's world an ME is not about to compromise. He gave his opinion based on his findings. He's done regardless of what the State feels happened. The ME has to testify because he is the one who did the report. Defense needs him to agree the shot was first and he will not do so because that is not his belief. He will not compromise. In the end it does not matter either way to JM. JM is more concerned that the story Jodi is telling is not consistent with the facts and that she is lying. It is his job to prove Jodi's story is again, just another lie to protect herself from the DP. I do not think defense is trying to disprove she cut Travis' throat, only that she was in a fog and therefore the death penalty should not be considered.

From the blood evidence at the sink (massive blood loss) where it appears he was either standing or kneeling, it proves she could have left the scene at that time. She did not do that but continued to stab him every 1 to 1 1/2 seconds after that finally ending by cutting his throat. It leaves no time for her to stop and evaluate, focus, whatever on getting away. Her intent with those actions are not to flee but to stay there follow him down the hall as he crawls (her description to Flores) and finish him off at the end of the hallway. That is murder 1. jmo

I do 100% believe he told Flores the GSW came first, now he has backtracked to say he can only speculate which sequence injuries occurred.

 

[LambChop]

Even if the jurors know she is a liar, hate her, and throw all of her testimony out the window...they still have to deliberate with the evidence at hand and decide if it was premeditated 1st degree or less. They have to follow the rules in deliberating a verdict, despite how they feel about her. There are some grey areas they will have to come to terms with. Much of it is circumstantial evidence that it was premeditated. I hope they can do the math on just how overwhelming the circumstantial evidence is in this case better than in the CA trial!

With the questions that JM put to Jodi while she was on the stand only to have him drop the subject once he was able to get a committed answer from her tells us he has evidence to prove she is lying. His whole cross was to prove she is lying. Lying about Travis being violent, lying about Travis viewing those pictures. We already know the day Jodi claims to have seen the pictures she didn't because she was at work. We know she cut her finger on the knife as she admitted that to Flores in her statement about the Ninjas. She's cooked. Defense is trying a last ditch effort in damage control with their experts. I'm surprised she did not say Travis came after her with a wooden spoon and she had a sudden flash back to her mother. Oh, sorry. She could probably still use that. lol

FYI. The problem with the CA jury is there was not one person on there who was willing work towards making an educated decision. They found her not guilty of manslaughter knowing Caylee had duct tape on her face covering her airways when she was discovered. Not one of those jurors was committed to those jury instructions. The worst of the worst and all too much alike by design. jmo

 

[LambChop]

I do 100% believe he told Flores the GSW came first, now he has backtracked to say he can only speculate which sequence injuries occurred.

Yes, I believe he could have speculated at the time with Flores if Flores asked if the gunshot was first. I think Dr. Horn could have said it could have been possible without reviewing his notes. That was the day of the autopsy and Dr. Horn had not yet done his report. I think in the doctor's mind the conversation was unremarkable and he does not remember. If he thought this conversation with Flores was significant in some way he may have remembered. But apparently it was not. I'm sure Flores remembers. He is a professional investigator and would have noted it. But I do believe when defense called Dr. Horn in for his deposition and he was under oath he told the truth according to what he knew when he wrote his report.

We know Flores felt all along it was a shot to the head first because to anyone it would make sense. But the ME has the final say if he goes unchallenged. And that is where we are right now. I don't think the defense wants to focus on it because of JM's potential cross of any expert they bring in who will testify that the cutting of the throat was overkill and premeditated. Better to just let is go away and focus on Jodi's "fog". jmo

 

[Tipstaff]

Not necessarily if knife is used first. At the end, she could have come to her senses after she slit his throat and thought, OMG he's suffering and shot him to end his suffering, with the gun that she didn't use first because it was not premeditated murder.

IMO

Or she could have called 911. :furious:

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

What's your point? Are you saying a man stabbed him?

 

[getReal]

Jodi has misinterpreted the self-defense concept by confusing "incapacitate" with "decapitate" re: using reasonable force until you can flee from the perceived immediate threat.

 

[wilsodh]

She cut his throat, 9 stab wounds to the back. There is nothing more premeditated than that. Once he is no longer a danger and she has a choice to get away and she decides to go ahead and kill him anyway it is premeditation whether the State is able to prove she planned it or not... jmo

Is this true in Arizona? Premeditation laws vary among states.

Dave