the question phase continues: Arias on the stand for the 18th day #85

[katiedid2]

Wait, BK just said that one of the defense witnesses is most likely going to claim that JA suffered from PTSD after killing Travis. Well of course she is, but how can that be? I thought the jury asked JA if she had been diagnosed or sought medical treatment for a medical/mental condition. JA answered no. Wouldn't PTSD fall under the mental health category?

Great catch! :seeya:

 

[Schuby]

My Chihuahua, Gracie, waited day after day to witness JA shake like her and make a connection. Alas, it wasn't to be. Maybe during sentencing.

My chihuahua, Ginger, is deeply offended by JA appropriating her signature dance move.

 

[luvtenniss]

I believe that the whole thing took 62 sec. is true because she had the gun and knife with her. She watched him die slowly.

Seriously, her story of being body slammed, rolling over, and getting the gun and shooting Travis would have taken 62 seconds. Juan pointed that out so subtly, JA didn't even know what he did. She's toast.

 

[Sulamith]

Jody Arias goes to her bishop AFTER the murder and admits the sex. So now she's in the process of repentence without confessing that SHE MURDERED SOMEONE!

This reveals part of her motive, which was to restore her good name and smear Travis' because he threatened to expose her for the beeyotch thief? that she is. She fully intended to keep this murder secret forever.

If she went back to the bishop and told him that she murdered someone after she confessed that she slept with him--and didn't tell him that--she would be excommunicated.

I am sure she fooled the bishop, crying and carrying on that she didn't want to do the nasty but he made her and now he's dead and he was so wonderful, kind, lit up a room...I'm sue the bishop felt sorry for her almost-widowhood and just put her on probation.

What a monster.

Jumping off of your post annagrammy. If JA did confess murder to a Mormon bishop does not mean she would be excommunicated. I give you Anne Perry aka Juliet Hulme. There was a movie about her. Heavenly Creatures She was a murderer, yet the Mormon church embraced her. https://www.lds.org/ensign/1984/01/...velist-with-a-commitment-to-morality?lang=eng No mention of the murder.

 

[AZWatcher]

Kudos for trying this experiment! As to physics: The rotational force/arc (flip) of the shelf is governed by Torque = Force x Distance. So if the supporting pegs are close to shelving edge (meaning there is a small overhanging "lip" of the shelf beyond the pegs), the Distance between the point of rotation (the pegs) to the Force (JA's foot pressing down) would produce minimal Torque ("rotation").

If the shelf had heavier items on it toward the back, this is downward force ... would have "counterweight" to the torque applied at the lip of the shelf.

Depending on the Length of the shelf (Distance to the edges of support) JA did (or did not) step on, I can "buy" her story, to a degree. (No, not really.)

What I LOVE about your experiment is that in reaching across and pulling something off the upper shelf ... it "Discombobulated." No way items on the shelves, whether up or down, were left in one place.

EXACTLY! You see in the past I have in fact stepped on a low shelf and sort of boosted myself up to grab shoes that were DIRECTLY above me and sitting at the edge of the shelf. ( Incidentally, they came crashing down onto my head) NO WAY I am reaching that high and right and getting something in the CORNER without some sort of catastrophe below.

 

[panthera]

Juan Martinez: "He's just threatened your life and you turn your back on the threat?"

Priceless!!!

 

[getReal]

I believe that the whole thing took 62 sec. is true because she had the gun and knife with her. She watched him die slowly.

In a thread one or two days ago, while discussing the last woman executed in AZ was in 1930, and though she was hung, then the rope snapped at the bottom of the drop her head severed from the body ... which led to the introduction of the gas chamber as the method of execution. And in the resulting discussion, it was determined that even a head severed by a guillotine can take 13 seconds to die. :what:

 

[molly333]

Her testimony has given me ALL OF THE ABOVE! Does that count?!? :banghead:

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[pghbrandi]

I think the defendant contradicted herself on purpose many times. And she said that she said things before (like today when she said TA said the gun was loaded) when she really hadn't.

I think she has purposely stated contradictory things because she wants to wreak chaos in the jury room. She wants them to argue with each other and cause an overall state of confusion about the evidence/testimony, such as "she said x"...."no, she said y"...."

...kind of like what happens here with us on WS.

Maybe her strategy is "baffle them with BS."

Grrr....just typed something hit backspace and lost it all!!!

Did you hear her when they were talking during the whole "perhaps Travis had the knife" thing? Juan said she never said any of that before. She said no one asked her that question.
She's basically saying unless you are absolutely specific, she can say whatever.

( I'm pretty sure it was the knife. The more I think maybe it was about the gun.) I'm sorry! I'm foggy!

 

[borndem]

OK! Here's what happened:

The shelf that I put my foot on was approximately 12 inches from the ground ...
I stepped on the very edge of it while at the same time grabbing the higher shelf with my left as though I was reaching for something higher and to my right.... the back side of it tipped up and then landed back on its pegs only slightly (but definitely) disturbing the shoes on it.

Here's what I was totally NOT expecting to happen (because I suck at physics)... The shelf I grabbed with my hand SLID out towards me really fast and cleared the back peg platforms and fell down between the 4 pegs and the shoes landed on the shelf below it!!!

Wow, AZWatcher! Thanks for the experiment and your detail of what happened. Now we have proof of what nearly all of us thought would happen!

Now -- are you going to call Juan or will I have to do it?!

 

[JRS_JD2L]

Good points. But do you worry that there are so many interuptions and delays that the defense could appeal the verdict on the basis that the trial was unfair due to the jury not being able to get their information in a somewhat steady fashion.

I am afraid that the defense is puposely stopping with sidebars and stopping the proceedings as often as possible so that they can turn around and appeal the case based on all the interuptions that they themselves are causing.

I cannot see how any delay in the proceedings would unduly prejudice a defendant, unless it were shown that the judge purposely delayed the proceedings to benefit the prosecution. And, there would have to be an objection by the defense on the record, pleading such an objection, for the appellate court to entertain it.

 

[G&AMom]

A major characteristic of PTSD is the inability to stop reliving the trauma, not amnesia. The inability to rid the mind of griisome images, sounds, smells.

I don't think she has the capacity to even be traumatized by what she actually did, much less what she claimed to do.

Fognesia isn't PTSD.

You're right and I knew that, too. Must be my own Fognesia setting in.

Plus, I wasn't really even answering the thought posed by the original poster. Their comment had to do with whether Jodi could claim she had PTSD after she supposedly hadn't seen a therapist.

Sounds like it's time for me to go to bed!

 

[panthera]

Well after the last 6 weeks of hellish testimony from JA, I'm feeling much better about the outcome of this. She sunk herself imho. My only fear now is one holdout juror hanging this jury. But I don't see an acquittal coming. (Then again, didn't see it with CA either).

Hopefully the domestic violence / PSTD "experts" won't muddy the waters too much for the jury, and Martinez can defuse them. Does he have any of his own scheduled for rebuttal? Anyone know?

Remember in January when they said this would go to April? They were right.....

Not sure regarding Martinez having any DV experts scheduled to testify, however, why should he? He is totally going to disseminate whoever the defense calls. There is absolutely no self-defense, and no abuse.

No comparison to the other case you mentioned. We all know how Travis died and who killed him.

MOO

 

[Angelina Frost]

I've read posts tonight from some that think JM didn't make an impact in the courtroom today. I thought he made a lot of great points, and again chipped away at her lies and inconsistencies. He was restricted to addressing ONLY the juror questions, and I thought he did an amazing job of showing how her story keeps changing, and how SHE can't even remember from minute to minute what she has testified to. I think his rebuttal will be strong, and his closing will put all the pieces together.

Nurmi was shut down a LOT by the judge today, and the majority of his objections were overruled. Her defense is sinking like the Titanic IMO. It seemed like Nurmi was deflated when she made that statement that "sometimes I felt like I may have provoked Travis". I don't think that is what he was looking for in her response. Someone said that this is exactly what a DV victim would say, but when you look at it in the context of what she claims as "abuse" it doesn't wash.

LoL, anybody else think NG's producer (Matt Zarrell sp?) sounds like a chick? His voice is bizarre.

BBM- great post, thank you.

For anyone who doesn't understand what JM is doing, they're thinking WAY too linearly. This is a boxing match and they have to fashion him into a prizefighter. JM is too cagey and smart to go for a knockout in one punch. He hustles and flows, fakes out his opponent, jab, jab, jab...then in rebuttal, BOOM!

She's on the ropes and the jury knows it. Expect her to suck the canvas in 3 weeks. :thud:

And ITA that Matt's voice sounds bizarre- like he's gargling with cut glass. Yikes.

 

[Schuby]

Grrr....just typed something hit backspace and lost it all!!!

Did you hear her when they were talking during the whole "perhaps Travis had the knife" thing? Juan said she never said any of that before. She said no one asked her that question.
She's basically saying unless you are absolutely specific, she can say whatever.

( I'm pretty sure it was the knife. The more I think maybe it was about the gun.) I'm sorry! I'm foggy!

Oh and her eyes were lit up like a Christmas tree too. I think she was suddenly struck by how good this could be for her story but then quickly realized it would sound absurd to introduce at this point so backed off.

 

[noZme]

Y'all stop wrecking your houses testing the ridiculous theory of JA stepping on the shelf to reach the gun that was never there. The gun was brought with JA on her homicidal mission & Juan will leave no doubt in the mind of any jurors.

 

[Kaddy Wonders]

I sometimes think the judge may say "overruled" to Nurmi because SHE wants to hear the answer!

 

[eLeL724]

Good points. But do you worry that there are so many interuptions and delays that the defense could appeal the verdict on the basis that the trial was unfair due to the jury not being able to get their information in a somewhat steady fashion.

I am afraid that the defense is puposely stopping with sidebars and stopping the proceedings as often as possible so that they can turn around and appeal the case based on all the interuptions that they themselves are causing.

If the <modsnip> is requesting all of this, then could it really be appealed based on the fact that this is a DP case & the judge is just giving the <modsnip> literally every single thing that it asks for (in order for them to vigorously defend their client)? The judge is supposed to go above and beyond to try & accommodate as many of the <modsnip> requests -as legally possible- in a DP case, so in this case the judge is just giving everything that the <modsnip> is requesting. Sooo not sure how this could be appealed down the road...?? There was a case not too long ago where the defendant appealed their case based on the fact that their own <modsnip> lawyer had fallen asleep during some part(s) of his or her trial. Now I would consider a defending attorney falling asleep (if in fact that's true) a VERY appealable issue and an instance like that is what the appeal process was made for. But the judge in that case disagreed. If an attorney falling asleep doesn't win a defendant an appeal, I don't see how a defense making a trial drag on due to their own actions -all the while doing so to vigorously defend their client- will be cause for an appeal. Then again, I've seen some appeals won on some very silly/ridiculous reasons in the past.

 

[scorpio24]

My chihuahua, Ginger, is deeply offended by JA appropriating her signature dance move.

:floorlaugh: She's a sociopath. She steals personality traits from everybody. Even our dogs!

 

[pferrin]

Well, of course the 62 sec. is true, because the photos prove it. My point was that JA's version of events is impossible...

I have a similar layout of rooms closets bathroom. Etc. so i tried the 62 second thingie. I got the online stopwatch and tried to make the same moves that JA says she did.

I can tell you now..there is no way. I know that the jury knows the truth and so do we. BTW. I hurt my back trying this so beware.:banghead: