Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/14/14

[Nali87]

Again, I think a great strategy on cross would be to show this email to Dr. F and have her agonizingly read through it line by line and mind-read about JA's intentions and how this email shows JA's appeasement of Travis's unreasonable behavior, etc. etc.:

"Hey You…
I haven’t heard back from you. I hope you’re not still upset that I didn’t come to see you, I just didn’t have enough time off. It’s ok, sweetie, you’re going to be here in less than two weeks – we’re going to see the sights, check things off “The List,” and all kinds of fun things. Oregon is BEAUTIFUL this time of the year. Yaaay!..... be happy!
Anyway I wanted to let you know that I’m thinking about pushing my visit up to next week, but it depends on my budget, so I’m not for sure yet. I know you’ll be in Cancun, but I’ll probably crash at your house in your cozy bed anyway… eat some of your oatmeal and frozen dinners you know, the usual – jk I know you said the door is always open, but I wanted to give you a heads up. If for any reason that won’t work, let me know and I’ll make arrangements. Your house has always been my second home, although it’s a bit more lonely without Naps around. You’re probably in California right now, but wherever you are, get a hold of me, at least before you get to Mexico.
Thanks hon, -Jodi "

...

and then spring it on her that it was written after Jodi had KILLED Travis and therefore maybe, just maybe, this practice of email analysis with no context is risky business.

I'd be willing to bet the defense hasn't shown the email to Dr. F--it isn't relevant to their theme. And if they have, JM could still make a big deal out of the fact that Dr. F wants to consider the context for THIS email but doesn't seem to care about that for any other email.

That is brilliant! I wish he would do that. P.S If Nurmi brings this up on monday then we'll know for sure they stalk your posts for tips.

 

[Hope4More]

Again, I think a great strategy on cross would be to show this email to Dr. F and have her agonizingly read through it line by line and mind-read about JA's intentions and how this email shows JA's appeasement of Travis's unreasonable behavior, etc. etc.:

"Hey You…
I haven’t heard back from you. I hope you’re not still upset that I didn’t come to see you, I just didn’t have enough time off. It’s ok, sweetie, you’re going to be here in less than two weeks – we’re going to see the sights, check things off “The List,” and all kinds of fun things. Oregon is BEAUTIFUL this time of the year. Yaaay!..... be happy!
Anyway I wanted to let you know that I’m thinking about pushing my visit up to next week, but it depends on my budget, so I’m not for sure yet. I know you’ll be in Cancun, but I’ll probably crash at your house in your cozy bed anyway… eat some of your oatmeal and frozen dinners you know, the usual – jk I know you said the door is always open, but I wanted to give you a heads up. If for any reason that won’t work, let me know and I’ll make arrangements. Your house has always been my second home, although it’s a bit more lonely without Naps around. You’re probably in California right now, but wherever you are, get a hold of me, at least before you get to Mexico.
Thanks hon, -Jodi "

...

and then spring it on her that it was written after Jodi had KILLED Travis and therefore maybe, just maybe, this practice of email analysis with no context is risky business.

I'd be willing to bet the defense hasn't shown the email to Dr. F--it isn't relevant to their theme. And if they have, JM could still make a big deal out of the fact that Dr. F wants to consider the context for THIS email but doesn't seem to care about that for any other email.

Imo doing that effectively undermine her credibility, but her credibility isn't the only aspect related to the emails.

These jurors are trying to understand CMJA, and Travis, because that's what they are being asked to do. I think best friends calling Travis abusive stands apart from her lack of credibility in saying what they meant by it.

 

[MeeBee]

When diagnosed Travis as a sociopath stating "he's a sociopath with how he treats women," I knew instantly she is a quack who doesn't know what she's talking about, especially when the real sociopath is sitting about 15 feet from her. A knowledgable psychologist would never have said it that way nor attempted to diagnose someone based on things said in one email chain.

 

[bznbear]

I'm surprised at how many schizophrenics have not only been sentenced to death but have actually been executed. That's a hard one for me to digest.

And then you have Arias who is just plain evil/sociopathic trying to use the mental illness excuse. Please! Even if someone were to offer me a thousand bucks to find ONE mitigating factor, I simply couldn't do it. There are no mitigating factors. None. Send her away to death row already. She richly deserves it.

I've always been for the DP in selected cases, and couldn't give it out for someone killing in the throes of schizophrenia. I have grown wearier and sicker by the day of this DT and their convicted client; their stack of lies, their attacks on the brutally murdered victim. I would vote DP, no doubt. I hope the jurors feel as I do.

 

[MeeBee]

Imo doing that effectively undermine her credibility, but her credibility isn't the only aspect related to the emails.

These jurors are trying to understand CMJA, and Travis, because that's what they are being asked to do. I think best friends calling Travis abusive stands apart from her lack of credibility in saying what they meant by it.

But the emails lack context and they are trying to paint a picture of Travis for the jury based on these emails that are without context. AZL's suggestion will make the very valid point that you can't always get the full story from an email because it is completely lacking in context. It won't just undermine her credibility, it'll undermine her entire process in assessing who Travis was and who Jodi was, even.

 

[Nali87]

Imo doing that effectively undermine her credibility, but her credibility isn't the whole problem caused by the emails.

These jurors are trying to understand CMJA, and Travis, because that's what they are being asked to do. I think best friends calling Travis abusive stands apart from her lack of credibility in saying what they meant by it.

Yes, I agree. Especially since their "you're abusive to women" BS was in regards to his behavior pre-Jodi as well. It's not like their criticism was purely based on what JA told them. Maybe JM can somehow make it clear to the jurors that the behavior the Hudges deem "abusive" might only be abusive to them because of their own beliefs.

 

[Hope4More]

When diagnosed Travis as a sociopath stating "he's a sociopath with how he treats women," I knew instantly she is a quack who doesn't know what she's talking about, especially when the real sociopath is sitting about 15 feet from her. A knowledgable psychologist would never have said it that way nor attempted to diagnose someone based on things said in one email chain.

We all agree she's not exactly top tier. But I don't think she was offering a diagnosis. Her speciality seems to be to deprive some words of all meaning, and to infuse other words with too much . She pounces on TA 's casual use of the term sociopath so that the jury might mistake her deliberate repetition as a diagnosis. She'll absolutely deny she said any such thing if JM poses the question.

 

[MeeBee]

We all agree she's not exactly top tier. But I don't think she was offering a diagnosis. Her speciality seems to be to deprive some words of all meaning, and to infuse other words with too much . She pounces on TA 's casual use of the term sociopath so that the jury might mistake her deliberate repetition as a diagnosis. She'll absolutely deny she said any such thing if JM poses the question.

She did say, "Travis is a sociopath with how he treats women." It's a totally incorrect use of the word. Yes, I'm sure JM will be all over that.

 

[Lissa]

Did Defense Expert Damage Travis Alexander’s Computer Hard Drive?

November 14, 2014 by The Trial Diaries


In a new motion filed by Juan Martinez, it states that the “defense expert damaged the computer during his last examination preventing the State from making a mirror image of the hard drive.” The State is requesting a copy of the mirror image to examine the defendant’s claims made in that salacious motion handed in by defense over the weekend. Take a look, read, and see what you think……The Trial Diaries
http://thetrialdiaries.com/did-defense-expert-damage-travis-alexanders-computer-hard-drive/

I love JM! So succinct!

 

[AZlawyer]

She did say, "Travis is a sociopath with how he treats women." It's a totally incorrect use of the word. Yes, I'm sure JM will be all over that.

Well, who knows if she said that. We're operating from tweets. Suppose it went like this: KN: "And so Travis admits he's a sociopath?" Dr. F: "According to his own meaning of that word, yes, Travis is a sociopath with how he treats women."

 

[Hope4More]

But the emails lack context and they are trying to paint a picture of Travis for the jury based on these emails that are without context. AZL's suggestion will make the very valid point that you can't always get the full story from an email because it is completely lacking in context. It won't just undermine her credibility, it'll undermine her entire process in assessing who Travis was and who Jodi was, even.

Strip away everything else for a moment. Say someone showed you a long long email written by and about people you don't know. Every sentence in the long email accuses the recipient of being abusive, neglectful, and a user of women. The person showing you the email tells you the sender and recipient are close friends.

Wouldn't you have doubts about the recipient, especially if you read his reply in which he says he's bad to women?

I think that kind of impressions sticks, and won't be erased by a one pronged attack on her credibility. Jmo.

 

[MeeBee]

They damaged the hard drive? So strange. I wonder how that happened? And all so inappropriate they they were allowed to examine the actual hard drive.

 

[MeeBee]

Strip away everything else for a moment. Say someone showed you a long long email written by and about people you don't know. Every sentence in the long email accuses the recipient of being abusive, neglective, and a user of women. The person showing you the email tells you the sender and recipient are close friends.

Wouldn't you have doubts about the recipient, especially if you read his reply in which he says he's bad to women?

I think that kind of impressions sticks, and won't be erased by a one pronged attack on her credibility. Jmo.

It doesn't have anything to do with her credibility. Everyone is hoping that Juan will call the Hughes' to provide context to these emails.

Again, you're talking about the defense presenting a picture of Travis that is lacking in context. Making the point that you can't get a full picture from a few emails is making the point that this woman did not get a full picture of Travis or their relationship. Did you actually interview these people to find out what they meant? Did you interview his other friends? Family? Previous girlfriends? He certainly made all these points, especially the lack of context, in the first trial. It is dangerous to provide your "diagnosis" of someone based on so little info. I'm sure he will make other points, as well. The lack of context thing would only be one small point and I think the point is AZL's suggestion would be a clever way to go about that.

She also says she made her conclusions by watching previous testimony. I'd be very curious if the defense allowed her to watch the cross examinations or jury questions or, you know, interviewed these people herself. She's supposed to be providing a forensic analysis and she went about it all wrong.

 

[Nore]

Have they ever shown the video where Jodi says Travis wasn't abusive to her? I'm sure I heard it. all JM. has to do is play that for the jury and it backs him up. How can she claim abuse now? Proof of what a liar she is .To me this seems like all heresay. They are cream of the crud..

 

[MeeBee]

Well, who knows if she said that. We're operating from tweets. Suppose it went like this: KN: "And so Travis admits he's a sociopath?" Dr. F: "According to his own meaning of that word, yes, Travis is a sociopath with how he treats women."

True. We're lacking in context, lol.

 

[Sedona722]

Again, I think a great strategy on cross would be to show this email to Dr. F and have her agonizingly read through it line by line and mind-read about JA's intentions and how this email shows JA's appeasement of Travis's unreasonable behavior, etc. etc.:

"Hey You…
I haven’t heard back from you. I hope you’re not still upset that I didn’t come to see you, I just didn’t have enough time off. It’s ok, sweetie, you’re going to be here in less than two weeks – we’re going to see the sights, check things off “The List,” and all kinds of fun things. Oregon is BEAUTIFUL this time of the year. Yaaay!..... be happy!
Anyway I wanted to let you know that I’m thinking about pushing my visit up to next week, but it depends on my budget, so I’m not for sure yet. I know you’ll be in Cancun, but I’ll probably crash at your house in your cozy bed anyway… eat some of your oatmeal and frozen dinners you know, the usual – jk I know you said the door is always open, but I wanted to give you a heads up. If for any reason that won’t work, let me know and I’ll make arrangements. Your house has always been my second home, although it’s a bit more lonely without Naps around. You’re probably in California right now, but wherever you are, get a hold of me, at least before you get to Mexico.
Thanks hon, -Jodi "

...

and then spring it on her that it was written after Jodi had KILLED Travis and therefore maybe, just maybe, this practice of email analysis with no context is risky business.

I'd be willing to bet the defense hasn't shown the email to Dr. F--it isn't relevant to their theme. And if they have, JM could still make a big deal out of the fact that Dr. F wants to consider the context for THIS email but doesn't seem to care about that for any other email.

I love this strategy, it is brilliant! My question......would JM have to inform the DT he was using this email?

 

[AZlawyer]

True. We're lacking in context, lol.

Yeah, I think the point is that these are people (Travis, the Hugheses) who have SUCH high standards that things that are perfectly normal flaws to most of us are abusive and sociopathic to them!

 

[cindymac]

Good point! Do you think she's lying about them officially being a couple in Feb 2007? It's odd that there's no record of him at least calling her on V-Day.

According to Arias, Travis sent her children's Spiderman underwear, and a box of chocolates, for Valentine's Day 2007. She claims she found the package on her doorstep.

Unfortunately, she forgot (when creating this lie) that she emailed Travis that same day - after she would have received the package - and made NO mention of the package whatsoever.

Another great example of Juan's attention to detail. He revisits the issue in his closing - excerpt here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnFNCe3XVg0

 

[Smarty Jones]

When diagnosed Travis as a sociopath stating "he's a sociopath with how he treats women," I knew instantly she is a quack who doesn't know what she's talking about, especially when the real sociopath is sitting about 15 feet from her. A knowledgable psychologist would never have said it that way nor attempted to diagnose someone based on things said in one email chain.

^^^^This!

 

[MeeBee]

Yeah, I think the point is that these are people (Travis, the Hugheses) who have SUCH high standards that things that are perfectly normal flaws to most of us are abusive and sociopathic to them!

Exactly!