Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 27, Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
While ago Fox News had two guests on to talk about this trial. They both could not believe that the judge let Jodi give secret testimony and left it in without Juan being able to cross her. They said that put Juan at a disadvantage. They both think the jury will not give the death penalty. One mentioned the defense putting in all the things Travis was sending to different young women at the same time. He said something about this jury not seeing all the things the first jury did, like the gruesome crime scene. I can't remember if he mentioned the autopsy photos or not. I thought they had seen those photos. He said they wouldn't know how heinous the crime had been. I don't know if he forgot that this crime had already been proven to be "especially cruel."


I think the jury has seen the crime scene photos and autopsy photos - months ago. Hope Juan ends his closing displaying these photos.
 
If JW was smart, she would get DR off the stand ASAP. But no one ever said JW was smart.
I am just extremely glad that I don't have to listen to her high pitched voice this time around.
When Dr. D gets on the stand they should hand out ear plugs.

Thanks for all the great posts. I will thank now because it is so hard during the tweetfest.

:floorlaugh: and she disappears just like jodi did, without an explanation to the jury :thinking:
 
Her testimony is staying in because Juan WANTS it to stay in. And the reason is because now he doesn't have to deal with her being on the stand while he crosses her, making up new lies as she goes along. He can "cross" with her prior testimony (video) or with other witnesses or by commenting on her testimony in closing.

Thank you. I'm back on track now!
 
id ignore it,seems like someone is here just to cause aggrivation...i might be wrong

Im thinking the same i type out a long reply but decided the time out wasn't worth it. I'll apply the law of attraction and not write down anything negative lol
 
Her testimony is staying in because Juan WANTS it to stay in. And the reason is because now he doesn't have to deal with her being on the stand while he crosses her, making up new lies as she goes along. He can "cross" with her prior testimony (video) or with other witnesses or by commenting on her testimony in closing.

I'm not sure what I prefer; a part of me thinks it hurts the prosecution that she's not testifying again. Because JA is her own worst enemy and I know that her testimony and cross would have worked against her...

On the other hand, her lack or remorse was made abundantly clear already so in a sense JM got what he needed.

--

What excuse/explanation can you think of that JSS might give to the jury for JA cutting her testimony short, Azl?
 
Yesterday when they were trying to schedule the interview with Smith Nurmi said he couldn't do it that evening so do it in the morning. Then Willmott said 8:00 wouldn't be a good time for her. How could a time when she was supposed to be on trial possibly be better for her than a time when she was supposed to be free? What could she possibly have needed to do an or so before the beginning of trial that couldn't wait?
 
This sounds like a fun fun project! All that info, all in one spreadsheet. ♥ But yes, a lot of work.

No, don't share your personal email addy. Maybe make a temporary gmail account just for this? You could then also use Google Docs collaborative tools if you wanted to. People here could anonymously put the puzzle together as a group. Maybe give access by private message here on WS to other members who could also create gmail accounts solely for this project.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/

I've never done this... I could see it failing miserably lol.

:thinking: of an appropriate gmail throwaway account... how about [email protected]?
 
Re JM not asking for JA's secret testimony to be stricken, JA inadvertantly mentioned two experiences that showed she knew JA didn't own a gun: 1) JA told the jury she offered to lend Travis her stun gun, because he didn't have one and was staking out his car in hopes of nabbing the "tires slasher" and 2) I can't remember but ZoeyW had an excellent post noting both.

The stun gun malarky was in her journal, not her secret testimony.
 
Yesterday when they were trying to schedule the interview with Smith Nurmi said he couldn't do it that evening so do it in the morning. Then Willmott said 8:00 wouldn't be a good time for her. How could a time when she was supposed to be on trial possibly be better for than a time when she was supposed to be free? What could she possibly have needed to do an or so before the beginning of trial that couldn't wait?

Her bangs.
 
Yesterday when they were trying to schedule the interview with Smith Nurmi said he couldn't do it that evening so do it in the morning. Then Willmott said 8:00 wouldn't be a good time for her. How could a time when she was supposed to be on trial possibly be better for than a time when she was supposed to be free? What could she possibly have needed to do an or so before the beginning of trial that couldn't wait?

Dunno what she had planned at that point, but by the end of the day she had an audio tape to 'edit' before today. :badmood:

ETA: did I say edit - I meant review, of course
 
OMG, I'm envisioning an Excel spreadsheet ... each documented date across the top columns, each source (text, email, blog post, testimony, interrogation) on the left-side column and details in each cell. I want to tackle this project SOOOooo bad.

Oy, I think of doing this often, but every time I do I get exhausted just envisioning it and need to drink 3 bottles of wine.
 
Yesterday when they were trying to schedule the interview with Smith Nurmi said he couldn't do it that evening so do it in the morning. Then Willmott said 8:00 wouldn't be a good time for her. How could a time when she was supposed to be on trial possibly be better for her than a time when she was supposed to be free? What could she possibly have needed to do an or so before the beginning of trial that couldn't wait?

Maybe another client of her's that needed to be in court at 8:00 am.
 
The question is, what did she do to retaliate after his blog post to bring about his 'worst thing that ever happened to me' declaration?

We'll never know. But even if she did nothing else at all , she'd already earned that designation. I think Travis had suppressed a heck of a lot of anger over the litany of abuses and betrayals she had subjected him to. Not sure anymore if it would have taken a huge nasty by her for him to finally tell her to piss off.
 
As he has done with Dr. F and Dr. G in front of this jury countless time. Remember Dr. F actually turning towards the jury and tell them "See this is how he twist things?" or some other crap. He didn't run to JSS and Dr. F sure gave him reason enough to.

Now JW runs off to JSS after bullying DR.
Neumesiter saying he won't go down slime highway with Juan, or some such nonsense. They only make themselves look bad- that is how it comes across to me anyway.
 
Yesterday when they were trying to schedule the interview with Smith Nurmi said he couldn't do it that evening so do it in the morning. Then Willmott said 8:00 wouldn't be a good time for her. How could a time when she was supposed to be on trial possibly be better for her than a time when she was supposed to be free? What could she possibly have needed to do an or so before the beginning of trial that couldn't wait?
I think she has a child or children. Getting them up, fed, dressed and off to wherever it is they have to be can be the early morning priority. I can understand that.
 
I think she has a child or children. Getting them up, fed, dressed and off to wherever it is they have to be can be the early morning priority. I can understand that.

I thought she didn't have children?
 
Willmott and Nurmi seem to have no regard for the jurors. They appear to be so utterly clueless on how to treat the jurors--you know, be mindful of their time, speak politely etc. IIRC Nurmi did not even say 'thank you' after his closing arguments (penalty phase I think) last time around. He's also paranoid about them doing their own case research. No trust, no respect, no civility. That's one thing that Baez did well in the other trial. He knew how to bond with the jurors. It's part of the reason for the extraordinary outcome.

These lawyers are so arrogant, so incompetent, so uncouth that it makes me wonder whether they really have their client's best interest at heart. Being gentle and polite with everyone could potentially tug at a juror's heartstrings and lead to a hung jury. I don't know whether to laugh or cringe at their miserable performances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
576
Total visitors
745

Forum statistics

Threads
626,021
Messages
18,515,779
Members
240,893
Latest member
Noob
Back
Top