Interesting analogy. In both cases there's a break with reality, in the case of Rambo due to the trauma of war, in the case of JA perhaps her psychopathy doesn't permit her to align with reality. It reminds me of the Japanese holdouts of WWII who continued to 'fight' the war in the jungles of the Philippines for decades after the war had ended, either because they were cut off from communication with the outside world or they couldn't conceive of a Japanese surrender and dismissed the news as enemy propaganda. This latter most closely resembles the inability of her psychopathic mind to accept any responsibility for her actions and define her current situation as justice.
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #8
- Thread starter Coldpizza
- Start date
- Status
Interesting analogy. In both cases there's a break with reality, in the case of Rambo due to the trauma of war, in the case of JA perhaps her psychopathy doesn't permit her to align with reality. It reminds me of the Japanese holdouts of WWII who continued to 'fight' the war in the jungles of the Philippines for decades after the war had ended, either because they were cut off from communication with the outside world or they couldn't conceive of a Japanese surrender and dismissed the news as enemy propaganda. This latter most closely resembles the inability of her psychopathic mind to accept any responsibility for her actions and define her current situation as justice.
I also am reminded of her when Kyle Reece implores Sarah Connor "Listen and understand! That terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!"
I'm not that big of a movie quotes person, but every once in a while a string of words is just so apt.
That pretty much defines psychopathology doesn't it? Whether it's Bernie Madoff building a personal kingdom on the inevitable financial ruin of thousands upon thousands of people, or someone who murders their innocent spouse for no other reason than they're in the way of their selfish ambitions, or any number of a whole spectrum of lesser or greater crimes where a complete lack of conscience is an obvious and necessary prerequisite, they are crimes perpetrated by people who are human in appearance only, who wear decency like a mask and are constitutionally incapable of humility or of checking their own ambition against the harm it may cause. They can only be stopped when the harm they cause traces back to the source and the mask is thus removed.
DidIAskYou
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2015
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 28
"It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." True, "it" doesn't. Didn't you love Judge Sherry "Counsel-Please-Approach" Stephens's articulation of the aggravators and mitigators, including "the defendant's expressed remorse" (to which she gave the weight of one feather). And what has also always struck me about Jodi and her ilk is that they don't feel shame. Can you imagine showing your face in that courtroom with everything that was exposed? Jodi claimed to be embarrassed or shamed by it, but she wasn't at all as far as I could tell. "Oh, she may cry behind that hair" or whatever JM said in closing, but she didn't care and didn't feel shame. It still breaks my heart that Travis knew at some level what he was dealing with but still could not believe that she wasn't really a normal but flawed person.
All this has been said many times before and better by some of you who are reappearing. I post now mainly to say how good it is to see your posts and your names again. Hope4More, thanks as others have said. Steve44, you've reached a new height of eloquence with your last few posts, so thanks for those. I could single out a few more, including the one I quoted above (sorry, I'm losing track now, was that Geevee), but I'll let it go now. Thanks to all of you for caring.
All this has been said many times before and better by some of you who are reappearing. I post now mainly to say how good it is to see your posts and your names again. Hope4More, thanks as others have said. Steve44, you've reached a new height of eloquence with your last few posts, so thanks for those. I could single out a few more, including the one I quoted above (sorry, I'm losing track now, was that Geevee), but I'll let it go now. Thanks to all of you for caring.
natsound
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 5,129
- Reaction score
- 1,932
I just finished watching the entire trial, and I'm currently reading Juan Martinez' book. I'm left with a few questions:
What is your theory on what happened with the license plates? When did JA take them off the car, and when did she put the back plate back on? Outside Travis' house after the murder?? Did she not notice it was upside down?
How on earth could the car rental place write off the stains in the car as red kool aid, and wash it out?
Why do you think JA killed Travis three times? Do you think she slashed his throat to get him to stop screaming, or to make sure he was dead? Why the final shot in the head?
How come no one heard the gunshot?
Why do you think JA left the camera in the house?
I have more q's, but that's all I can think of right now.
What is your theory on what happened with the license plates? When did JA take them off the car, and when did she put the back plate back on? Outside Travis' house after the murder?? Did she not notice it was upside down?
How on earth could the car rental place write off the stains in the car as red kool aid, and wash it out?
Why do you think JA killed Travis three times? Do you think she slashed his throat to get him to stop screaming, or to make sure he was dead? Why the final shot in the head?
How come no one heard the gunshot?
Why do you think JA left the camera in the house?
I have more q's, but that's all I can think of right now.
Plates: we can only speculate but since she made obvious efforts to keep her presence in Arizona as stealth as possible (turning off her phone, gas cans, dyeing hair) California plates in Travis' neighborhood around the time of the murder, while not directly incriminating, were a weak point. One could speculate that she would try to keep the plates off the car as much as possible, particularly in close proximity to Travis' house and while the car was parked. Placing the plate back on upside down provides an added layer of obfuscation to the casual observer, but at the increased risk of being pulled over by L.E.
Red Cool Aide: she could have bought actual red cool aide and dumped it on top of any blood in the car to conceal it from casual detection.
Killing him three times: she's a psycho.
Thanks for the kind words DidIAskYou. So many of the people that participated in these discussions over the years have my deepest respect and admiration, that's a large part of why I think I've come back now and then.
natsound
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 5,129
- Reaction score
- 1,932
The license plate thing is a thorn in my side. I don't know how she got away driving any distance without a plate.
It's AMAZING how she became her own undoing by keeping all of those receipts and leaving the camera in the washing machine. What a case.
It's also amazing TA let her in and fooled around with her. They had just had a big blowup through text messaging about two weeks before, and he had horrible things to say about her. On top of that, she had already slashed his tires twice. He knew her character and he must have been scared of her.
natsound
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 5,129
- Reaction score
- 1,932
Martinez mentioned in his book that he saw grey in JA's hair during the trial. I didn't see it. But I bet she's getting grey now, and her cheeks are just beginning to sag (you can see that in her most recent mug shot). I wonder if she's now reflecting on the choices that ruined her life, for the rest of her life.
Only4Justice
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2004
- Messages
- 1,689
- Reaction score
- 8,048
JMO, but shes probably still blaming Travis. Idk she is able to see her own part in this horrible crime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hasn't this already been on TV?
https://corporate.discovery.com/dis...series-jodi-arias-an-american-murder-mystery/
ETA Sneak peak video
https://www.investigationdiscovery....r-mystery/full-episodes/jodi-arias-sneak-peek
https://corporate.discovery.com/dis...series-jodi-arias-an-american-murder-mystery/
ETA Sneak peak video
https://www.investigationdiscovery....r-mystery/full-episodes/jodi-arias-sneak-peek
I thought there was a show on not too long ago. I did not watch it nor can I stomach watching this one....it’s the felon I do not want to see.
I bet she would love to see herself on TV....but I do not think she will. Someone will tell her all about it though!
More than a few folks here don't believe they DID have sex that day. 
About the license plate. I actually drove around T's house and neighborhood a few years back. Visiting there cemented my opinion she never parked her car in the driveway, nor in front of his house. My guess is that she parked in the alley/side street near his house, which would have put her 1/2 a block from his house, around the corner, and given her choice of white for rental, nothing would have stood out about the car being there. Except, maybe, CA plates.
My guess on when she switched plates around changes, but I think she took off the front plate before going into AZ, and that she took off her rear plate after arriving in the early AM dark near his house. I've thought it at least possible if not likely that she took off a plate from T's car and put it on hers (rear) before she sneaked all the way into his house that AM, as Travis and his roomies slept.
After checking out/driving her only possible exit routes from Mesa, I'm very sure she would not have dared leave Mesa that early evening with no plates on her car (rush hour, extremely congested traffic for at least one hour on the road).
Which IMO makes it likely she switched plates either after she killed him, or that she left , briefly, T thinking she'd left altogether, and switched plates then (upside down in her haste to get back to his house and kill him, or in her haste to get away).
About the license plate. I actually drove around T's house and neighborhood a few years back. Visiting there cemented my opinion she never parked her car in the driveway, nor in front of his house. My guess is that she parked in the alley/side street near his house, which would have put her 1/2 a block from his house, around the corner, and given her choice of white for rental, nothing would have stood out about the car being there. Except, maybe, CA plates.
My guess on when she switched plates around changes, but I think she took off the front plate before going into AZ, and that she took off her rear plate after arriving in the early AM dark near his house. I've thought it at least possible if not likely that she took off a plate from T's car and put it on hers (rear) before she sneaked all the way into his house that AM, as Travis and his roomies slept.
After checking out/driving her only possible exit routes from Mesa, I'm very sure she would not have dared leave Mesa that early evening with no plates on her car (rush hour, extremely congested traffic for at least one hour on the road).
Which IMO makes it likely she switched plates either after she killed him, or that she left , briefly, T thinking she'd left altogether, and switched plates then (upside down in her haste to get back to his house and kill him, or in her haste to get away).
IMO, an upside-down license plate would make a vehicle stand out and I cannot see anyone who is trying to hide in plain sight willfully installing a plate upside down. I believe she removed plates so no one could jot down the numbers in the event her vehicle aroused suspicion in the neighborhood, then put them back on in haste somewhere a distance away from the murder scene and that it may have been dark at the time, or dark enough that she did not notice it was upside down.
She plotted and planned in advance but when everything went down it didn't all go according to plan and she was pressed for time almost from the beginning, which resulted in her making some major mistakes. The palm print, for one. Upside-down license plate on her getaway car was likely another.
All IMO.
She plotted and planned in advance but when everything went down it didn't all go according to plan and she was pressed for time almost from the beginning, which resulted in her making some major mistakes. The palm print, for one. Upside-down license plate on her getaway car was likely another.
All IMO.
About why kill him 3x.....
Steve's answer - that she did so because she's psycho- is both apt and beautifully succinct.
My opinion (never succinct, but hopefully apt at least here & there):
Having a gun was clearly extremely important to her, since she went to the effort, however clumsy, stupid, & self-defeating, of staging a burglary to obtain one.
To have is not necessarily to use, though,and IMO (on most days) is that she didn't intend to actually shoot him with it. The
plotted and planned his murder for a long time. She didn't just want to kill him, she wanted to torment him as much as she could , in every way she could, before she stabbed him in the shower. Her texts and journals make plain that she remembered every "slight" by Travis, and that she forgave him not at all for anything, ever. I think she brought the gun to mock him with it in the shower (his near death experience when a gun was pointed at his head), which would also have had the benefit of having him focus so much on the gun that he'd be utterly off guard when she pulled out the knife and stabbed him.
I think she slashed his throat out of increased rage that he hadn't conveniently died in the shower, as she had imagined he would, that he had resisted her will all the way down the hall, that he had kept on trying to talk.
And, am least sure why she shot him after she slashed his throat, except to speculate perhaps she just hadn't gotten her fill of killing him yet.
About why leave the camera? For me, that's one of the biggest don't knows, and from JM 's post- book interviews, I think he really doesn't know either.
))That
is incapable of feeling shame, or embarrassment, or remorse, or love, or empathy, or sympathy, or kindness, or generosity, or much of anything else at all except rage and anger and paranoia and fear and fleeting moments of self-congratulation/adulation.It breaks my heart too that Travis couldn't see her more clearly, and from the very beginning, but most of us think as adults that monsters aren't real,that they are just the stuff of childhood nightmares and imagination. And, after all, she CHOSE Travis as her prey & victim, knowing full well the vulnerabilities & goodness of him that would make seeing her for what she was, and acting upon that knowledge to protect himself from her, just about impossible.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 2,896
- Reaction score
- 8,691
Jim Clemente and crew interview Nurmi. Episode was posted Nov. 1 but I just noticed it this week.
http://player.fm/series/real-crime-...e-93-kirk-nurmi-and-the-defense-of-jodi-arias
http://player.fm/series/real-crime-...e-93-kirk-nurmi-and-the-defense-of-jodi-arias
Finally getting to what I came here the other day to post, before getting diverted by Natsound's questions.
Nurmi has filed his reply to the's civil suit against him. To summarize:
* he won't be representing himself- he's hired a top-notch attorney for his defense.
* he slams's 48 -odd page complaint as being "tedious" and "verbose" and says that it's length violates applicable rules for form (lol).
* he asserts that the complaint is groundless, should be dismissed, and that the should pay for his legal fees to date.
* he (his attorney) provides a very long list of the legal defenses they will pursue if the suit moves forward. One of those defenses asserts "fraud," which presumably refers to some action by the.
* he also asserts (in convoluted legalese) that in essence, the is herself responsible for whatever harm she claims has been caused by the info about her that has been made public.
This is where it gets a bit interesting. Nurmi specifies which "paragraphs" in the complaint he acknowledges to be true. Suffice to say that he doesn't concede very many of the 200 or so paragraphs are true or accurate. I'm on my phone and can't link to the's complaint , but it's here on this thread, on page 40, (post 587) posted by Geevee.
Here are the paragraphs he says are accurate: 2-7, 9-13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 161, and 162.
What is in paragraph 1? 8? 14? 16? (Cont in post below)
Nurmi has filed his reply to the
's civil suit against him. To summarize: * he won't be representing himself- he's hired a top-notch attorney for his defense.
* he slams
's 48 -odd page complaint as being "tedious" and "verbose" and says that it's length violates applicable rules for form (lol).* he asserts that the complaint is groundless, should be dismissed, and that the
should pay for his legal fees to date.* he (his attorney) provides a very long list of the legal defenses they will pursue if the suit moves forward. One of those defenses asserts "fraud," which presumably refers to some action by the
.* he also asserts (in convoluted legalese) that in essence, the
is herself responsible for whatever harm she claims has been caused by the info about her that has been made public.This is where it gets a bit interesting. Nurmi specifies which "paragraphs" in the complaint he acknowledges to be true. Suffice to say that he doesn't concede very many of the 200 or so paragraphs are true or accurate. I'm on my phone and can't link to the
's complaint , but it's here on this thread, on page 40, (post 587) posted by Geevee. Here are the paragraphs he says are accurate: 2-7, 9-13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 161, and 162.
What is in paragraph 1? 8? 14? 16? (Cont in post below)
Continued from last post:
Paragraph 1: simply asserts that the "at all relevant times" resided in Maricopa County.
Interesting that Nurmi specifically dissects that assertion elsewhere, acknowledging only (for whatever reason ) that the had been incarcerated in Maricopa County.
Paragraph 8: states that Nurmi "is and was" a member of the AZ bar and thus responsible for adhering to the ethical rules and fiduciary responsibilities all AZ bar members must honor.
(Nurmi seems to suggest elsewhere that he is no longer bound to the Bar's rules/code of conduct).
Paragraph 14. (this and 16 are interesting): Clark ( attorney) states as fact that the roles of the defense team are decided upon at the "onset" of trial; that the 1st chair (Nurmi) is in charge of the team, makes all the final strategic decisions, and is focused upon "investigating and defending" the guilt phase of the trial (as opposed to penalty phase).
Paragraph 16 states as fact that it is the role of second chair (Wilmott), working with the mitigation specialist (MDLR in this instance) to investigate and prepare mitigation for the penalty phase of trial.
Hmm. Have a feeling Nurmi is ready & willing to discuss the's role in determining trial strategy, including those attacks on Travis she now alleges Nurmi instigated and insisted upon, despite her pleas that he not do so.
---------
As far as the's COA appeal docket. There still hasn't been anything added to the docket since October 23, 2017, when the Court ruled Clark could access sealed files. This stretch of inactivity is one of the longest there's been since her appeal was first filed in May, 2015. I'm starting to feel cautiously optimistic that the 's opening brief will be filed on schedule, in late February.
Paragraph 1: simply asserts that the
"at all relevant times" resided in Maricopa County. Interesting that Nurmi specifically dissects that assertion elsewhere, acknowledging only (for whatever reason ) that the
had been incarcerated in Maricopa County.Paragraph 8: states that Nurmi "is and was" a member of the AZ bar and thus responsible for adhering to the ethical rules and fiduciary responsibilities all AZ bar members must honor.
(Nurmi seems to suggest elsewhere that he is no longer bound to the Bar's rules/code of conduct).
Paragraph 14. (this and 16 are interesting): Clark (
attorney) states as fact that the roles of the defense team are decided upon at the "onset" of trial; that the 1st chair (Nurmi) is in charge of the team, makes all the final strategic decisions, and is focused upon "investigating and defending" the guilt phase of the trial (as opposed to penalty phase).Paragraph 16 states as fact that it is the role of second chair (Wilmott), working with the mitigation specialist (MDLR in this instance) to investigate and prepare mitigation for the penalty phase of trial.
Hmm. Have a feeling Nurmi is ready & willing to discuss the
's role in determining trial strategy, including those attacks on Travis she now alleges Nurmi instigated and insisted upon, despite her pleas that he not do so.---------
As far as the
's COA appeal docket. There still hasn't been anything added to the docket since October 23, 2017, when the Court ruled Clark could access sealed files. This stretch of inactivity is one of the longest there's been since her appeal was first filed in May, 2015. I'm starting to feel cautiously optimistic that the 's opening brief will be filed on schedule, in late February. She sees her part more than anyone else can, but she also cares less than anyone else can. This is no paradox, this is explanation.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 229
- Guests online
- 723
- Total visitors
- 952