Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/17-11/18/14 In recess

[katiecoolady]

Well, if we were to rely on the good doctors professional opinions, we are all sexual deviants, those that like a brazilian and especially those of us that post/text after 11pm, just when you thought you've heard it all (arghhh) . . . . where do they find these people??!!

I really missed the whole post 11pm thing. How did anyone keep a straight face on that? I guess she was trying to say he kept Jodi for an afterhours hookup girl. But how about HER texting him at all hours during her drive-to-kill? Oh Juan is gonna have such a field day with all of this, if he ever gets to cross examine her in 2014.

(as an aside I love your doggie, what is it? I'm getting a cockapoo!)

 

[hindsight2020]

In the first trial, it would have been excluded as hearsay (as to what Dr. Hiatt reports that Travis said) and probably lack of foundation (as to Travis's suspicions regarding the identity of the tire-slasher). In this phase, it just isn't very relevant to whether or not Jodi's life is worth sparing.

Maybe because tire slashing was one of the alleged acts that Juan was not allowed to introduce as I recall.

That makes sense, I could not remember or recall this information from the guilt phase, thank you.

 

[katiecoolady]

Glad I made you laugh. I was hoping that you especially would appreciate them.

They are spot on...like the Greek Chorus coming out of her head. I love it.

 

[katiecoolady]

I don't understand how Jodi can testify on things Travis allegedly said or did but others can't..

Or take it one step further...an expert can testify to what Jodi said about things that Travis allegedly said who never met Jodi other than a few times years after the murder OR Travis. How many degrees of separation is it? I'm sure enough for Kevin Bacon to be involved.

 

[AZlawyer]

I don't understand how Jodi can testify on things Travis allegedly said or did but others can't..

Anyone can testify about things he did, if they're relevant. And anyone can testify about things he said, if they're not hearsay and are relevant. In the penalty phase, they can even be hearsay.

Lots of things that seem like hearsay are not actually hearsay, because there are so many exclusions and exceptions to the hearsay rule. Also, the definition of hearsay includes that the information is being offered for "the truth of the matter asserted." So, for example, if Jodi says, "Travis called me a ," she's not saying that to prove that she really WAS a , so it's not hearsay.

 

[AZlawyer]

Or take it one step further...an expert can testify to what Jodi said about things that Travis allegedly said who never met Jodi other than a few times years after the murder OR Travis. How many degrees of separation is it? I'm sure enough for Kevin Bacon to be involved.

Experts can generally testify regarding hearsay that they used to reach their opinions, although of course the opposing counsel can point out that it's hearsay and that the expert is clue-free about what actually happened.

 

[Nali87]

Or take it one step further...an expert can testify to what Jodi said about things that Travis allegedly said who never met Jodi other than a few times years after the murder OR Travis. How many degrees of separation is it? I'm sure enough for Kevin Bacon to be involved.

True lol. But hearsay is something I just can't wrap my head around. In Dutch' court, hearsay is admissable. If you can't get the whole story, from both sides, then how can you arrive at a just verdict? :thinking:

 

[hindsight2020]

I really missed the whole post 11pm thing. How did anyone keep a straight face on that? I guess she was trying to say he kept Jodi for an afterhours hookup girl. But how about HER texting him at all hours during her drive-to-kill? Oh Juan is gonna have such a field day with all of this, if he ever gets to cross examine her in 2014.

(as an aside I love your doggie, what is it? I'm getting a cockapoo!)

I don't know whether to laugh at Dr. Fonseca or cry, her testimony is disconcerting, oh well, Juan will make this right, hopefully soon, I won't hold my breath though, we may not hear from him until after the holidays, I wish it was before, we'd have something more to celebrate.

Ahhh, my neighbor has two cockapoos, they are adorable, great disposition and very intelligent.
He is a mini poodle, his name is Cody, 6 months, and I kid you not the other day I called him Jodi, I was lol, but mad at the same time.

 

[katiecoolady]

What if we want to see the stun-belt dance.
I might even pay per view that one.

OMG I almost said THAT EXACT SAME THING! lol :happydance:

 

[bsk]

Anyone can testify about things he did, if they're relevant. And anyone can testify about things he said, if they're not hearsay and are relevant. In the penalty phase, they can even be hearsay.

Lots of things that seem like hearsay are not actually hearsay, because there are so many exclusions and exceptions to the hearsay rule. Also, the definition of hearsay includes that the information is being offered for "the truth of the matter asserted." So, for example, if Jodi says, "Travis called me a ," she's not saying that to prove that she really WAS a , so it's not hearsay.

BBM - But what if Travis called her a "shank"? :facepalm: Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[katiecoolady]

I don't know whether to laugh at Dr. Fonseca or cry, her testimony is disconcerting, oh well, Juan will make this right, hopefully soon, I won't hold my breath though, we may not hear from him until after the holidays, I wish it was before, we'd have something more to celebrate.

Ahhh, my neighbor has two cockapoos, they are adorable, great disposition and very intelligent.
He is a mini poodle, his name is Cody, 6 months, and I kid you not the other day I called him Jodi, I was lol, but mad at the same time.

I think that' might be called dog abuse lol. Aw he's so cute.

Now let me keep this on topic--yes the Juan cross of this Dr. will be fascinating. I sincerely hope he tones down the "outrage" TONE of the cross and just hammers her point by point quickly with his "yes or no" stylings. Just keep holding her feet to her own self made fire. And the juror questions, well that will be a field day.

 

[katiecoolady]

True lol. But hearsay is something I just can't wrap my head around. In Dutch's court, hearsay is admissable. If you can't get the whole story, from both sides, then how can you arrive at a just verdict? :thinking:

And then the "he said" business born from the mind of a KNOWN and admitted pathological liar who's already been convicted of murder. Sorry don't want you to get whiplash trying to wrap your head even further. (Are you Dutch?).

 

[katiecoolady]

Experts can generally testify regarding hearsay that they used to reach their opinions, although of course the opposing counsel can point out that it's hearsay and that the expert is clue-free about what actually happened.

"Clue-free" I love it. Can I steal it sometimes?

 

[katiecoolady]

Ok to be fair, I was allowed to testify to things my sister said to me. Why was this allowed AZL?

 

[Nali87]

Anyone can testify about things he did, if they're relevant. And anyone can testify about things he said, if they're not hearsay and are relevant. In the penalty phase, they can even be hearsay.

Lots of things that seem like hearsay are not actually hearsay, because there are so many exclusions and exceptions to the hearsay rule. Also, the definition of hearsay includes that the information is being offered for "the truth of the matter asserted." So, for example, if Jodi says, "Travis called me a ," she's not saying that to prove that she really WAS a , so it's not hearsay.

I don't understand. But that's just my brain being tired, I think. I'll do some googling tomorrow. Thank you.

 

[Tuba]

Hatfield, during the killer's allocution she referred to Travis' family in the courtroom and said she was disturbed by their physical resemblance to the man she was portraying as her abuser. I thought it was a gawdawful remark and I'm sure I wasn't the only one who gasped.

 

[katiecoolady]

Hatfield, during the killer's allocution she referred to Travis' family in the courtroom and said she was disturbed by their physical resemblance to the man she was portraying as her abuser. I thought it was a gawdawful remark and I'm sure I wasn't the only one who gasped.

That she referred to them at all. Sickening. And more of her glee at torturing them. Sick sick sick SICK evil killer. Surprised she didn't present them with a bouquet of Irises. Blech

 

[MeeBee]

Hatfield, during the killer's allocution she referred to Travis' family in the courtroom and said she was disturbed by their physical resemblance to the man she was portraying as her abuser. I thought it was a gawdawful remark and I'm sure I wasn't the only one who gasped.

It was such a dig. Most other allocutions the defendant will turn to the family of the victims and tearfully apologize, genuine or not. Jodi barely even acknowledged them and then claimed it was because they all looked like her abuser.

No soul. No remorse. Nothing.

 

[Niner]

I cannot wait for Juan's turn. LOL

I think the jurors will see it as a breath of fresh air. By the time he actually gets up there, the DT will have droned on for another day or so. They will be so over the 'sexpert' and her drivel. jmo

Didn't Nurmi mention that Dr. F would be on the stand for 2 to 3 days - and isn't she on her third day already?? I think - should say HOPE - that Juan will get his turn tomorrow!!!

 

[Nali87]

And then the "he said" business born from the mind of a KNOWN and admitted pathological liar who's already been convicted of murder. Sorry don't want you to get whiplash trying to wrap your head even further. (Are you Dutch?).

I have the Dutch nationality, yes. My island is part of the Dutch Kingdom. I was born and raised in Curacao (The caribbean), like Aruba, one of the former colonies of the Netherlands. I've been living in the Netherlands for 6 years now, to go to college and graduate school. ANYWAYS.. Long story short I consider myself more of an island girl than a Dutchie.