@TrialDiariesJ: So so sad to hear the loss of Det. Flores son in an accident. My prayers are with his whole family. I can't imagine the pain.
Oh nooo. Oh no...
This is so horrible.
@TrialDiariesJ: So so sad to hear the loss of Det. Flores son in an accident. My prayers are with his whole family. I can't imagine the pain.
@TrialDiariesJ: So so sad to hear the loss of Det. Flores son in an accident. My prayers are with his whole family. I can't imagine the pain.
Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 2h2 hours agoThis is terrible. May the good Lord hold this family close.
Juan Martinez Prosecutor Support Page
19 mins · Edited ·
Guys, sadly, we have clarification, Detective Flores lost his 15 year old son in a zip line accident. Please keep this family in your prayers.
Does anyone here know how to start one of the candle lighting pages?
I would love to light a candle for the family.
That would likely be her old Olympus, I meant her new Canon was probably what her June 3,2008 selfie would have been on. Btw, did any more come of our suspicions that her new Canon may have been what the $699 was for? Anyone have access to TA's old receipts...cc statements? She said in her journals that her camera broke on Sept.25, 2007, so if TA lent her the money for it, it would make sense.
Does anyone here know how to start one of the candle lighting pages?
I would love to light a candle for the family.
Random realization, after reading her mention of Cancun in the letter.
Early into the sex tape setup call in May, JA asks TA about his travel plans. Specifically, she asks him if he will be doing any international travel.
IIRC, he doesn't mention Cancun. But it is almost certainly Cancun that is on her mind, yes? Hadn't Travis just recently been told he'd earned the trip and could take a guest? When did he invite Mimi?
So she's either giving him the opportunity to invite her- he doesn't, or she's confirming to herself that he won't tell her he's going and taking someone else.
If the latter, I can only imagine how righteous she must have felt about deceiving him by recording the phone sex she solicited and meant to use to hurt him.
The 2 test thing. Geff did give her 2 tests on the same day (clearly stated in BK notes, muddled in tweets).
I think JM pointing out that the 2 tests produced different results kicked off the scuffling. Geffner said something to the effect of...I can see how it looks like she changed her answers, but that's not what happened. (this during intermission: first round of sidebars, etc. )
At sidebar, JM stated his objective in displaying the questions was to make it clear that she "fooled" the test. He argued that the questions were as relevant as her responses, that he should be able to use anything already entered into evidence, and that Geffner had no legal exposure as relates to the questions being displayed in open court.
Question #14 was the one asking for an account of if and what traumatic experiences. JM stated that other questions were just as relevant and wanted them all in. JSS ruled against him and allowed in only question #14.
JA took this test 3 times. Twice with Heffner (2013) once with Samuels (2010). She answered #14 differently each time.
In 2010, with Samuels, she was going with the ninja story and so the traumatic event she listed related to a stranger and was a lie start to finish, thus invalidating the test.
If I untangled all this correctly... The first test for Geffner was meant to buttress for trial her claim of self defense. Her response on #14 included her lie about being attacked by Travis in the bathroom and killing him in self defense.
Presenting that answer in court has to be problematic, yes? On the grounds of residual doubt, if nothing else. I think that's why JSS' was concerned, and why she asked JM where he was going with his questions.
Geffner test 2. I think his explanation for having her take it twice was that the second test was to ascertain how she reported PTSD relating to the "present."
So one test tailored to backup her specific self defense claims, and the other to more broadly depict her as the victim of DV?
Given that JM's request for additional questions to be shown to the jury triggered Geffner's and the DT's theatrics, I suspect that he can demonstrate that she lied repeatedly on the test, and on specific points he can effectively demonstrate and use against her.
Whether or not JM will be allowed to ask his questions on Monday seems to me to have nothing at all to do with copyright, but maybe something to do with skirting other problems presenting the material may cause. But that's just a guess.![]()