Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/20 Sizzle Break

[daisydomino]

Ha! I think of bacon!

I think of the sound my brain makes at the end of each day when this DT has a witness on direct. My chafed nerve endings. My raw, frazzled patience.

 

[LambChop]

I know we're supposed to not talk religion, but I'm thinking this factual question would be okay...because it's just a yes or no.

Bernina - Can people come home to visit (for holidays or otherwise) while on their mission?

This question is fine. I think what we want to stay away from is the discussion of the church in general. Jodi Arias is being judged in a court of law and not by the Bishop. Travis is the victim in this court trial. We need to focus on that.

Thanks, Lambchop

 

[TexMex]

Deanna testified that she met him in 1998. They began dating in 2000, just a couple of months before she left for Costa Rica in June 2000. While in Costa Rica her only communication was through letters. In June 2001 Travis wrote that he wanted to date other people so they broke up. She returned from Costa Rica in November 2001 to Riverside CA. She and Travis talked and got back together in early 2002 and were exclusive. In April 2004 the company she worked for moved to Phoenix. Travis moved too, to Mesa. They kept dating until the end of 2005 when Deanna told Travis they had dated long enough. She wanted marriage, he didn't. They both cried and agreed to remain friends.
She says their relationship was fun. They enjoyed being together.
Travis never raised his voice to her. He never screamed at her. He never cursed at her. He never grabbed her. He never threw her down. He never advanced on her physically. He never called her names. Juan asked her all of this multiple times. She said Travis would never treat her that way.

Deanna starts at 55 min

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSpVrL4H7Q

Now I have to watch cross

 

[MeeBee]

Do people really think Sherry is going to allow JM to rebut this garbage presented by JA? He's not even allowed to cross exam witnesses! Why in the name of all that is holy would anyone have faith that this jury will be shown the truth? Sherry is incompetent. IMO
Yes, I know I'll now be lectured about how brilliant she is and fair and delightful....:sick:

No. The judge will make a new rule that cross examination by the state is no longer permitted. She will then order that the state will also not be able to put on a rebuttal, thus severely limiting Juan's ability to make a case.

 

[KPinMN]

Every time he posts "sizzle" I think of a nice big juicy burger w/chezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Mmmmm, sounds soooooo good...especially while I look at the boring salad I made for dinner.

 

[Destiny617]

Missionaries do not return home, they are allowed to call home on Mother's Day and Christmas and that's it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know we're supposed to not talk religion, but I'm thinking this factual question would be okay...because it's just a yes or no.

Bernina - Can people come home to visit (for holidays or otherwise) while on their mission?

:seeya:
Just as information for the question posed which is a pertinent question to the testimony (testiphony affidavits) about DH today:

In my personal experience having had a brother and many friends serve on LDS Missions, there are very very few exceptions to a missionary returning home during their usual service time (1.5-2years usually). Exceptions I know of are a death in the family (edit added: though a missionary is encouraged to stay on a mission, but they still have a choice; edit ended) or if the person on the mission has a medical condition that requires immediate attention either unavailable in the area they are serving or the rare need to be close to family during treatment until they are healthy enough to choose to return to their proselytizing.

Hope this answers your question

(I can't find any legitimate and reliable sources on the Internet for this information so I guess this will just have to be MOO until I can verify it via an accurate website and not a personal blog)

 

[Hope4More]

I think the reason why JM was angry about the affs' content being largely admitted is because he is a passionate advocate of Travis' family and knows the affs would hurt them. That they're meant to do just that. I genuinely don't believe he's concerned about them strategically.

 

[Madeleine74]

No. The judge will make a new rule that cross examination by the state is no longer permitted. She will then order that the state will also not be able to put on a rebuttal, thus severely limiting Juan's ability to make a case.

:floorlaugh: thanks for the giggle.

 

[TexMex]

Deanna testified her mission was from June 2000 until November 2001

Doubtful to me that Travis would throw her down and curse about never marrying her in November 2001 when he had broken up with her by letter in June 2001. They had only dated a couple of months before she left on her mission.

 

[katydid23]

Deanna testified that she met him in 1998. They began dating in 2000, just a couple of months before she left for Costa Rica in June 2000. While in Costa Rica her only communication was through letters. In June 2001 Travis wrote that he wanted to date other people so they broke up. She returned from Costa Rica in November 2001 to Riverside CA. She and Travis talked and got back together in early 2002 and were exclusive. In April 2004 the company she worked for moved to Phoenix. Travis moved too, to Mesa. They kept dating until the end of 2005 when Deanna told Travis they had dated long enough. She wanted marriage, he didn't. They both cried and agreed to remain friends.
She says their relationship was fun. They enjoyed being together.
Travis never raised his voice to her. He never screamed at her. He never cursed at her. He never grabbed her. He never threw her down. He never advanced on her physically. He never called her names. Juan asked her all of this multiple times. She said Travis would never treat her that way.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSpVrL4H7Q

Now I have to watch cross

Given the above timeline, how would that story about him yelling he 'would never marry her' make any sense?

Doesn't he say it happened in 2001? That would make his story impossible. because she did not return until nov 2001, and they were already broken up. This is total BS

 

[TexMex]

Given the above timeline, how would that story about him yelling he 'would never marry her' make any sense?

Doesn't he say it happened in 2001? That would make his story impossible. because she did not return until nov 2001, and they were already broken up. This is total BS

Exactly. Watching now I think Juan expected this affidavit crap. He asked her 4-5 times the list: did Travis hit, yell, curse, scream, throw you down, advance on you physically, grab you. Every time she answered no. She's extremely believable

 

[Hatfield]

Well that would be an interesting maneuver and one that would elicit peals of laughter from a CoA. "You object to the judge allowing you to do what you did because you think she shouldn't have allowed that to come in, even though you argued for it to come in and won?" "And the state argued against it but lost and you were allowed to enter your evidence..." "And that hurt your client how exactly?" :floorlaugh:

nahhh just don't see that.

Good Point but I could see Nurmi exclaiming:

"It hurt our client because we did not realize at the time that our own witness who submitted the affidative was lying to us. Since we could not question him further on the stand, we were not able to get to the truth. The prosecutor then painted him as the liar he was and it hurt our client's case."

I just think the DT has had a plan this entire phase of forcing something to happen incorrectly in this trial that they can then use in an appeal later on.
I think they are using JSS willingness to allow them favors to push the limits past the point where it can end up being a valid appeal issue.

I am worried about appeals just like JSS is. The difference is that I think she is going so far with allowing the DT favors that she is going to be the one that causes the situation.

 

[KPinMN]

So we all know the reputation of Marc McGee, but the jury doesn't. If JM brings in Deanna for rebuttal can he ask her about him? Like does she know him, does she remember meeting him, what's her impression of his character? I really hope so because that should totally negate all his ugly affidavit secret lie truths.

 

[5bigfish5]

Here's a list of things I learned in trial by tweet today (some funny, some not so funny):

*what it means when someone asks you carpet or linoleum

*TA likes to talk to and flirt with pretty women

*TA was not suffering from ED (erectile dysfunction)

*It's normal for Mormons to gift interested people The Book of Mormon, but when TA does it it's manipulative

*TA was a "giver" in the oral arena

*Suicide humor is manipulation (guess I'm in trouble given how often I put my finger gun to my head reading trial by tweet)

*If the DT claimed their bowel movement from this morning was mitigating evidence it would be admitted and would not be subject to cross examination. Further it's identity would be held secret for fear of threats to "flush" it

Hopefully my learning tomorrow is more along the lines of how JM decimates DT witnesses on cross.

Hate to admit it, but I got 5 pages behind on the carpet vs linoleum thang.

 

[Hatfield]

I expected about as much out of today as we got. The ONLY thing I am upset about IS: Juan not catching that little game Willmott was playing with what was "ON" the overhead projector and what was visible to the jurors.

SHAME on the DT and Juan.

TRIPLE Shame on Sherry for doing, as usual...NOTHING!

Does someone know what happened with the overhead projector? What game was Wilmcott playing?

 

[5bigfish5]

No. The judge will make a new rule that cross examination by the state is no longer permitted. She will then order that the state will also not be able to put on a rebuttal, thus severely limiting Juan's ability to make a case.

PLEASE tell me you are kidding.

 

[LambChop]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSpVrL4H7Q

Deanna

Good find. Her testimony at the trial is in direct conflict with what this witness is reporting. Travis broke up with Deanna in the Summer of 2001 while she was still doing missionary work. Said he wanted to date others. They had only been dating a couple of months prior to her leaving for Costa Rica. She returned in November of 2001 and they did not start seeing each other and dating again until the beginning of 2002. This is in conflict to what he is reporting. Plus she testified he never hit her ever, did not yell at her, raise his voice, nor curse at her ever. He's toast.

So was defense sleeping during her testimony? jmo

 

[TexMex]

Deanna tells Nurmi that marriage had been discussed prior to her leaving on her mission.
She didn't put much thought into it because it was too early in the relationship to really think in those terms plus she was leaving for 18 months.
She tells Nurmi she was sad after receiving the breakup letter. Says after returning to Riverside in Nov 2001 she first saw Travis two weeks later. She learned he was dating Linda Ballard.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sAv-cvfUZbU

 

[Sulamith]

Hate to admit it, but I got 5 pages behind on the carpet vs linoleum thang.

I know ha ha! I got my DH interested in this trial and I was reading all the Tweets to him today. It took us a minute to figure out what carpet and linoleum meant. I said OMG we are old! Last year, we learned the Urban Dictionary definition of a tossed salad and a cream pie were!

 

[MeeBee]

PLEASE tell me you are kidding.

'Twas sarcasm.