JA knows the post cards will hit the media and her fathers new restaurant will be bombarded with hate mail....she's diabolical
What's this all about?
Apparently I missed out on a lot. Sorry for being annoying! :blushing:
JA knows the post cards will hit the media and her fathers new restaurant will be bombarded with hate mail....she's diabolical
Do any of you receive notifications from the AZ Public Notification Website regarding this case? If so, did you receive this notification:
Case Numer S-0700-CR-2008031021
Stat of AZ v. Jodi Arias on 3/22/2013
Event(s) --> Charge(s).
This was posted by someone on the State vs. Jodi Arias Facebook page. I went to the Court site, but could not find it, but I believe they are 24 hours behind posting to the websites.
Any idea what this is about? TIA
Off to work, still can't stop lmao thinking about this one...
"With 35 years experience, it didn't teach you to be accurate"... or something along those line.![]()
Here is the current outstanding list of items that point to JA premeditation:
*Renting a car in Redding vs Yreka (better rates and selection in Redding)
*Opting for a white car vs red car
*Reported burglary of .25 caliber pistol
*Purchase or borrowing 3 gas cans
*+/- Dyed hair from blond to brown
*Alteration of license plates
*Cell phone charger/ power in OFF position
*No Credit card transactions in Arizona
*Lied about rope
*Testified to an implausible alternate theory of the crime
Questions:
How did JA insure there would be no witnesses?
She just had to be aware of room-mates coming and going and if TA was expecting anyone -by asking him.
Where did she park in order to be undetected both in entering and exiting?
She certainly did not park in the driveway but being a rental -not far away.
What was the sequence of JA baggage. . . how was it brought in and how did she bring it out?
No baggage -she stayed way longer than she wanted to, at most a backpack.
How could JA explain the odometer reading of her rental car? She was tripped up by unaccounted for time spent traveling to Pasadena and Utah. How would she explain away the extra 1000 miles?
She got lost.
What is the smoking gun regarding premeditation?
I think Arias told LaViolette in the original accusation, that Travis was pleasuring himself to images on the computer. Then the information came out that there was no porn of any kind on Travis' computer.
She put LaViolette in quite the spot, and I don't know how LaViolette ended up testifying, but this is the same hearing that MM come into play.
This is VERY interesting! New charges...???
Possibly related to something that has taken place in the courtroom or jailhouse?
"Probability" is to Samuels as "Fog" is to Arias. Both are used as KY on the slope from fact to fiction. Both are used to obfuscate, and 'probability' is used to corroborate 'fog', so, it only begs the question. If Samuels cannot substantiate his 'probability', the fog is not a reasonable fact in this case.Please don't feel sorry for Dr. S
He has had a long career and I could go on about his experience, his associations etc.
The bottom line is Jodi Arias is a killer, she murdered someone in cold blood after planning this horrible unthinkable thing due to rage, jealousy and her inability to let go (to criminal proportions)
IF he indicates he does not believe that at all and she is a passive gentle woman that was abused then my respect for him plummets to less than zero. I know that he knows exactly what she is and what she did, he cannot believe the story she is telling even though he said he believes her.
That can only mean one of two things. He is either the worlds worst judge of character and worst therapist, psychologist that ever lived and believes everything his clients tell him because he has NO instincts whatsoever.
OR, he is doing this for money and he tailored his answers and reports to favor the Defense in the typical Expert Witness fashion and he could care less if he ever contributed to a Killer or Sex predator getting back out on the street as long as the check they give him is good.
Both options are bad.
Its really bothering me that when Samuels refers to JA's Ninja story, he keeps saying it was a defense mechanism - an alternate reality created because she was in denial. whaa?? Its as if he's not even aware that she has admitted the Ninja story was nothing more than a way deflect suspicion from her once she realized they had evidence she was there.
I really hope this gets addressed, I'd like to see him either admit he's wrong about it being an alternate reality, and/or admit she's completely put it over on him.
This is VERY interesting! New charges...???
Possibly related to something that has taken place in the courtroom or jailhouse?
I don't know if anyone has posited this yet, but I've always thought she held the gun on him while she began stabbing him. If he was sitting there under threat of a gun, he may have been waiting for an opportunity to grab it or to get away. If he lunged to escape the shower, maybe she stabbed him in the chest and that's when he staggered to the sink and the rest of the events occurred.
I can't figure how else it could have happened, and truly it's disturbing to even think about.
And the killer's not going to tell the truth unless maybe she's sitting on death row and thinks it'll get her some last bit of attention.
Just MOO.
This is VERY interesting! New charges...???
Possibly related to something that has taken place in the courtroom or jailhouse?
JA originally told LaViolette that Travis had the images on his pc but after she learned that he had noon his pc she changed it to on his bed. That is where Juan challenged her about telling the DV expert about the images on the pc and not the bed. It isn't that she will be lying on the stand but that she will be testifying to something JA told her...and that was when JA was lying to her.
Was MM at a hearing as well? Were these hearings televised?
Then why would the Prosection have added rebuttal witnesses from Tesoro and Walmart ?
For closing, I think JM should put this test up on the courtroom's whiteboard and have everyone on the jury take the test.
After a reasonable amount of time has passed, he should then throw up the score interpretations.
Perhaps, he could go one step further and have the jurors answer the test questions the way they believe someone with PTSD would answer them.
Then, ask them if they believe an experienced liar would be able to skirt the test?
I don't see that about Charges...
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov
3/21/2013 10:30 Trial
3/25/2013 10:30 Trial
3/26/2013 10:30 Trial
3/27/2013 10:30 Trial
3/28/2013 10:30 Trial
L@@kie!
Found some postcards JA wrote from jail: :rocker: sold on eBay.