Jodi Arias Trial discussion, #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
i think the prosecution is saying that after she killed travis because she was soo abused, she just went to see this guy w/ out a care in the world
 
:seeya:

Question : Has there been any "word" about the jury ? I know I know ... ya NEVER KNOW with juries -- BUT this is a DP case ...

So I was wondering IF there has been any news at all on the jury : their reactions ... are they interested ... how is the Judge treating them (I hope she is NOT treating this jury like Judge Perry did) ... etc. ?

Unfortunately, I have not been able to follow this trial as I had planned to here at WS, but have been able to watch some of it on the tube ... :eek:

THANKS !
 
That would scare the crap out of me.

According to his roommate he had an actual lock on bedroom door that needed actual key. Makes you ponder that was on NG last night:what:
 
Texts from witness Ryan Burns to defendant:

Defense exhibit #278

2194exj.png


Defense exhibit #279

35bysk0.png


Defense exhibit #282

34yzjuc.png


Defense exhibit #281

1038pqq.png


Defense exhibit #280

2w68ev8.png
 
Has it come out that this was witnessed by anyone? My point is he can say anything. She says he didn't lock his home. He says she crawled through the dog door. So without someone confirming either thing, stalking
isn't credible.

She moved to Mesa after they broke up to be near him. She slashed his tires twice. She hacked into his emails, bank account and myspace accounts. She tried friending girls he was dating on myspace. She drove over 1,000 miles to see him, not the other way around. All of that is stalking in my book.
 
trying to discredit the witness trying to show that yet AGAIN how poor Jodi was being used for sex.



I don’t agree or disagree with the line of questioning but it appears to me that the defense is trying to show a contradiction in his character. Since this is a death penalty case I would think more than the usual amount of latitude would be allowed. He presented himself one way to his fellow mormons and another way to “🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬”. We keep hearing what a devout mormon he was, when in fact we now know he had a sexual relationship with JA and compromised himself in the eyes of his church. In other words, defense is trying to show he lied about that indiscretion (a sin of omission?) and was capable of more lies and more deviant behavior and more omissions?
 
I hope on redirect they focus on the fact that she contacted him and didn't show up on the same day that she murdered Travis..

that is really the only importance this guy shows imhoo

YES! and that his memory/recall is very poor or he doesn't want to admit to any $ex
 
I just don't see the relevance of this witness much.

I was about to post same. The questions are the same over and over and I don't see the relevancy for the defense. Seems it show how malicious she is. jmo
 
Serious question, but what are the angles here for each side. I'm confused.
 
#280, #281 and #282 are admitted. . . .
Def. Atty wants RB to read #278 to self . . . text he sent to her @ end of April . . . he was explaining his continued romantic interest in her.

#279 - text message from RB to JA - further continuation of his romantic interest in her.

April 30 2008 8:03 - Never until I get my goodnight text from my adorable girl in Cali . . . #278

#279 - 4/30 8:13 AM - ty Gorgeous good night

#282 - Another text RB sent to JA - 5/3 7:09 am - Just come and stay :)
reference her coming to visit @ some point - wanted her to come

#281 - 5/3 7:19 am - Good, So I am getting closer to talking you in to it lol what do I have to do to seal the deal lol

he never felt that she was reluctant to come see him . . . what was the point of needing to talk her into it? just wanted her to come. . . .


#280 - 5/3 7:23am
You promise not to play hard to get when you get here lol

RB agree texts were flirtatous - they had engaged in sexual conversations after she was in SLC to visit. . . . before she went there - they talked about watching a movie and cuddling up. These texts are from a month before she came to visit -

had sexual conversations after her visit - are they the same character than what we see in these texts? We knew each other alot more after she visited - she spent whole day with me . . . we talked about why things didn't go further while she was there (sexually) but she explained she was a big girl and I didn't need to protect her feelings.

She did invite RB out to Cali after TA had died. . . . after text messages, phone conversations the IM's . . . RB was at least hoping for romantic interaction when she arrived . . . when she arrived 6/5/08 - RB was hoping for a romantic interaction . . . we joked about if RB would have to make a move - JA said she was a "snuggler" watching movies and snuggling up . . . RB found her attractive and wanted to pursue a romantic relationship (ie: kissing, cuddling) - hoping or expecting to happen in June. . .

RB says you are talking about before . . . .

Def. atty specifically talking about 6/2008 - that was the only time they spent time together . . . .

Different trips . . . got a little confused . . . when she arrived on 6/5 hoping to snuggle up and get to know her - didn't know if he would like her or not . . . . visit met his expectations - he was happy with her when she left.

sounds like they interacted for 24 hrs . . . she arrived on Thurs around 10 or 11 - she left next day @ midnight or 1 - a little more than a day. During that time he saw nothing abnormal - she was acting the same as his interaction with her before . . other than the cuts on her hand . . . she was shy in public - first time I saw her in public because in Oklahoma City only 3 or 4 min. in public - no previous real reference point in public.

Prosecutor: She didn't stay more than 24 hrs . . . only 14 or 15 hrs. . . . .

Text messages #280 - text 8 of 43 - are you hiding other texts somewhere? where are the other texts to her? are you responding to her? can you tell what she said before in # 8 . . . she could have said .... we are going to have some good sex . . .RB - she never said that . . . . any idea what you are resonding to ? NO

9/43 - #287 - don't know what was said before

22/43 - what was she saying before . . . . (object - argumentative) overruled. don't know what she is saying.

#278 - Never . . 23/43 text messages on 4/30 . . . 8:03 am -

#279 - 4/30 8:13am - - it is later. . . .

cuddling . . . interaction you had with her . . .was this first sexual interaction with her? yes . . none in Oklahoma City . . .kissing @ 3 or 4 pm . . .she arrived @10 or 11 . . .within 5 hrs of her arrival - cuddling include her moving you around, getting on top of her and grinding on your pelvis . . .

RB says cuddling is snuggling up to a movie. (means to him)

things changed - had a good time with her - spent whole day with her liked her alot . . . if more time was allowed do you think you would have engaged in sexual relations? it could have gone further . . .how about the first time i Oklahoma City - more time could it have gone further? yes it could have - object overruled

Mormon faith - any reason to doubt her sincerity involving what she told you why she was late in arriving in West Jordan Utah? Objection - approach
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
95
Guests online
556
Total visitors
651

Forum statistics

Threads
625,988
Messages
18,515,125
Members
240,890
Latest member
xprakruthix
Back
Top