Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #1

[Hope4More]

I don't think we know that at all. I think the implication was that she was sending the same witness who was performing an "evaluation" of her at the jail, which would be a psych expert.

ETA: Also, I thought the reference was to a "witness," and the PI would not be testifying.

The minutes state:

1. She is to interview her "expert witness" on September 2.
2. Minutes indicate she will be calling only one expert witness. (& JM has a "list" of expert witnesses he will call) .
3. JM is to help ensure that her "private investigator " is given access to the crime scene by August 28, that date apparently requested by the defendant.

4. The "expert witness" will be doing a (single visit) evaluation of CMJA that will not result in a report.

Deductions: The PI and expert witness are not one and the same. The PI would not need to or be qualified to "evaluate" CMJA. The arrangements are different...a date set for an interview (explicitly the expert) and a date set to visit the crime scene (explicitly the PI).

It's suggestive, IMO, that she wants the PI to have access to the crime scene days before she meets with the expert. IMO the expert is NOT a psych expert per se if at all. An evaluation doesn't necessarily relate to general psych status.

Maybe she's relying on a DV expert to testify solely about how a DV victim would respond in the specific physical space of Travis' house after being attacked by Travis.

 

[Hope4More]

I believe the crime scene visit is for one purpose regardless of who it is that is going in. The scene has changed enough that they are probably not going there looking for physical evidence; it seems they instead want to get a "feel" of the space, perhaps dimensions of specific areas. ... "Why didn't you run when you had the chance?" is one question the murderer has never been able to answer to anyone's satisfaction. Maybe the expert and/or PI need to see firsthand why this question still haunts.

I think you're right!!

 

[Hope4More]

Request submitted by Party 001, that is the defendant, Jodi Arias.

Surprise, surprise! Right on schedule. Of course she wants the cameras rolling.

 

[grammieto5]

Surprise, surprise! Right on schedule. Of course she wants the cameras rolling.

LOL now this will be the one time this judge denies this criminal.

 

[geevee]

LOL now this will be the one time this judge denies this criminal.

Remember her phone call to Troy Hayden to do an interview after the first verdict? I think it's quite likely that if she didn't file this request herself, she called someone in the media and let them know she wouldn't object to cameras if they brought the subject up to the judge again.

 

[MeeBee]

Request submitted by Party 001, that is the defendant, Jodi Arias.

You're right, looking at it, it does appear to be submitted by the defense. She just can't help herself. She is a fool. Her attorneys asked for the cameras to be taken away to help her, to help set up appeals in the future, i.e. She didn't get a fair trial the first time around due to media coverage and cameras present. Not saying it would ever have worked (especially as she has demonstrated a nack for seeking out the spotlight) but her asking for the cameras back totally negates that. It's one less thing she can appeal on. Even if she does still, no chance it would ever be successful now. You have lawyers for a reason, woman. You are not a lawyer.

 

[grammieto5]

YEP! I do remember that. I hope there will be cameras

 

[Tuba]

Arias believed she could mount her mitigation forces in secrecy. We have this continuance because the ordinary sign-in protocol at the jail did not satisfy her demands that her defensive efforts be kept under tight wraps. An officer at the jail balked at her arrangement and "did not comply". Here we have it again. The imposition of her will & her notions and it met with resistance.

Arias is not pleased that her expert and her P.I. will be undergoing interview and examination by Juan Martinez now. She knows that her carefully laid plans and her secret intentions will meet a scrutiny that discerns her purposes, so as to counter them. Weakness in a witness will be uncovered. Foiled again, Arias! I can hear her muttering in her sleep, "Why don't these freaks comply!"

 

[LinTX]

Yes, she apparently overestimated her 'power' to protect her poor widdle witnesses from bad 'ole JM. She thought all the talk of witnesses being intimidated or threatened would be enough to trash the State's right to interview/investigate witnesses? Wish I could have heard the tone used and JA's face when it was explained to her that she had to make them available ...I'm guessing that little display of arrogance/ignorance on her part even took JSS by surprise?

 

[janx]

Can't believe I missed that when I was at the docket earlier today, thanks for posting it. Since the media already asked for reconsideration of JSS's first rejection of their request (and was re-rejected), I wonder if they could ask again, or if it's coming from the defense (Miss Side Show herself)?

I know a lot of people think (even like to think) that this is coming from the defense, but I think it's more likely coming from media. They can make a lot of money selling air time if they can get a camera in there. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.

 

[MeeBee]

I know a lot of people think (even like to think) that this is coming from the defense, but I think it's more likely coming from media. They can make a lot of money selling air time if they can get a camera in there. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.

I feel like if it was from the media it would say. The details of the request are listed under the party 001 minute entry above it. I do think this one is coming from Jodi. I could definitely be wrong though.

8/21/2014 REQ - Request - Party (001) 8/21/2014
NOTE: REQUEST FOR CAMERA COVERAGE AND MODIFICATION OF MAY 21, 2014 RULING

 

[MeeBee]

Ok, so I know now party 001 only refers to the defendant but when it says party 001 it doesn't mean it's coming from them just that it is a motion in reference to them. So this motion could still be coming from the media or anybody. They could also be asking for an amendment to previous motion related to media coverage. I don't know what the May 21 ruling was. We'll find out.

And I'd just like to point out I don't want it to be coming from Jodi so I can hate on her. That's honestly what it looked like to me. In previous motions it would say CNN's motion to allow cameras. Here, it says nothing, which I thought signaled it wasn't coming from the media.

 

[Tuba]

Regarding domestic violence & battering, which will color her mitigation, the State torpedoed Arias' claim Travis physically attacked her on January 22. Martinez proved with workplace documentation that she was at work that day, at the time that
battery supposedly occurred. After work and a nap with headache, she talked to Travis on the phone. This was in the early evening and the call had to do with providing transportation.

Arias had believed this the perfect date to insert her fantasy attack because it was blank in her diary and she could always explain that his violence didn't comport with the Law of Attraction, so she wrote nothing. Her account was exposed in toto as a huge, detailed lie. And yes, Miss Arias, that does make you a liar.

When that lie exploded, it should have moved the walls & hit the ceiling of the courtroom. Ranks right up at the top of her d.v. deceits exposed for the defamation they are.

 

[MeeBee]

Regarding domestic violence & battering, which will color her mitigation, the State torpedoed Arias' claim Travis physically attacked her on January 22. Martinez proved with workplace documentation that she was at work that day, at the time that
battery supposedly occurred. After work and a nap with headache, she talked to Travis on the phone. This was in the early evening and the call had to do with providing transportation.

Arias had believed this the perfect date to insert her fantasy attack because it was blank in her diary and she could always explain that his violence didn't comport with the Law of Attraction, so she wrote nothing. Her account was exposed in toto as a huge, detailed lie. And yes, Miss Arias, that does make you a liar.

When that lie exploded, it should have moved the walls & hit the ceiling of the courtroom. Ranks right up at the top of her d.v. deceits exposed for the defamation they are.

Not to mention the finger that she said he broke is the same finger she laid in front of Det. Flores and said she hurt during the killing and that it seriously hurt and has been messed up ever since. She even had a fresh cut on it. She could not have had it messed up for life in both incidences. And what are the odds that one little finger in the middle of her had getting seriously injured twice in separate incidences.

That's why I'm not worried by what Jodi's trying to do. She can go out and get her sister to say she saw bruises. Juan will just ask her why she is never documented as ever having seen or said such a thing until just now on the stand after her sister's already been convicted of murder. She can go out and get Matt McCartney, we already know he's untrustworthy. She can get Daryl Brewer to say it. It would easily be exposed as a lie. She's not trying to get the truth. She is silently trying to coerce the people who love her into lying for her.

 

[Tuba]

Another statement Arias made to Det. Flores came back to me last night. She suffers from implausible deniability. I had posted in Sidebar her answers in television interviews, that yes, she told a lie and yes, she has lied before "but that doesn't make me a liar." I posed the probability that she also thinks that "Yes, I committed a murder in Mesa but that doesn't make me a murderer !" What I remembered last night was that she had used those very words when Flores was interrogating her. He produced evidence and pushed her through a corner. She had to admit, finally, that she had been at the victim's house that day & she then said, "But that doesn't make me a murderer!"

From all that is coming forth now in the courtroom, we know she harbors this hell-bent urge to disprove everything that has been said about her guilt in State of Arizona vs. Jodi Ann Arias. She is full of it and she is driven.

 

[AZlawyer]

The minutes state:

1. She is to interview her "expert witness" on September 2.
2. Minutes indicate she will be calling only one expert witness. (& JM has a "list" of expert witnesses he will call) .
3. JM is to help ensure that her "private investigator " is given access to the crime scene by August 28, that date apparently requested by the defendant.

4. The "expert witness" will be doing a (single visit) evaluation of CMJA that will not result in a report.

Deductions: The PI and expert witness are not one and the same. The PI would not need to or be qualified to "evaluate" CMJA. The arrangements are different...a date set for an interview (explicitly the expert) and a date set to visit the crime scene (explicitly the PI).

It's suggestive, IMO, that she wants the PI to have access to the crime scene days before she meets with the expert. IMO the expert is NOT a psych expert per se if at all. An evaluation doesn't necessarily relate to general psych status.

Maybe she's relying on a DV expert to testify solely about how a DV victim would respond in the specific physical space of Travis' house after being attacked by Travis.

That will teach me to post based on a vague recollection of a screen shot of the minute entry lol.

 

[Hope4More]

Regarding domestic violence & battering, which will color her mitigation, the State torpedoed Arias' claim Travis physically attacked her on January 22. Martinez proved with workplace documentation that she was at work that day, at the time that
battery supposedly occurred. After work and a nap with headache, she talked to Travis on the phone. This was in the early evening and the call had to do with providing transportation.

Arias had believed this the perfect date to insert her fantasy attack because it was blank in her diary and she could always explain that his violence didn't comport with the Law of Attraction, so she wrote nothing. Her account was exposed in toto as a huge, detailed lie. And yes, Miss Arias, that does make you a liar.

When that lie exploded, it should have moved the walls & hit the ceiling of the courtroom. Ranks right up at the top of her d.v. deceits exposed for the defamation they are.

I think JM proved that what she said happened on that day is highly improbable, but that he didn't prove it was impossible.

JM couldn't pin her down on when she left work and when she arrived at T's. There was theoretically enough time for the incident in between arriving there and when the text msgs began after she left.

Since he couldn't prove she lied based on the timeline alone, he went (effectively) after the connected lies.....many related to what both did afterwards.

 

[Nali87]

Regarding domestic violence & battering, which will color her mitigation, the State torpedoed Arias' claim Travis physically attacked her on January 22. Martinez proved with workplace documentation that she was at work that day, at the time that
battery supposedly occurred. After work and a nap with headache, she talked to Travis on the phone. This was in the early evening and the call had to do with providing transportation.

Arias had believed this the perfect date to insert her fantasy attack because it was blank in her diary and she could always explain that his violence didn't comport with the Law of Attraction, so she wrote nothing. Her account was exposed in toto as a huge, detailed lie. And yes, Miss Arias, that does make you a liar.

When that lie exploded, it should have moved the walls & hit the ceiling of the courtroom. Ranks right up at the top of her d.v. deceits exposed for the defamation they are.

Ugh. I'm still angry that this jury wouldn't have experienced all the times Jodi was caught lying on the stands. I wonder if JM can bring that in as video evidence?

 

[popsicle]

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 34m

Phoenix television stations file motion asking judge to overturn camera ban in #JodiArias trial.

 

[popsicle]

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq 2m
Media Motion for TV COVERAGE of #JODIARIAS filed 8/21/14. With Jodi in charge now of defense, will she agree? p1-4 pic.twitter.com/DiQ7o9gTJt