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

[luvtenniss]

BBM That's what I had been thinking but while looking thru the photos from 6/4 that I had previously rushed thru(JA's naked photos :rocker:uke I noticed a photo of her that appeared to be a bondage(?) sort of photo.

You know, I saw that too. It was a black, fluffy looking thing. I could not figure out what it was. It didn't look like a rope to me, but more of an accessory (an accessory to naked - weird ).

 

[molly333]

JA admitted to the shooting and stabbing of TA....she admitted to all of it on the stand....using self defense as her reasoning. Juan caught her up in every one of her lies on the stand. When he pointed out the little pegs on the shelves, well bless her little heart, she didn't even think that one out. She was steaming at that point. The jury is not from Pinellas and I am sure that if they were to deliberate today, they would come back with DP. I really see no reason for rebuttal, but I too can't wait for it....Juan has done a wonderful job with this case and he's not finished yet.....and the 62 seconds, I think he has proven that she knew right where that knife was....MO

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

 

[lisalei321]

I'm actually looking forward to Juan cross examing the DV defense lady (sorry can't remember her name).

I'm hearing a lot of "Ma'am, what if I told you that the defendant lied to you about <insert lie here>, what would your position on this be then?"

Could get really interesting then

 

[camcneishg]

ya know, they were on the JA from the get go due to all of TA's friends and JA herself calling.....they knew she had seen RB.....just maybe they took that road trip and found something. I know it's a stretch, but wouldn't that just be awesome.....she would $hit.

 

[molly333]

ya know, they were on the JA from the get go due to all of TA's friends and JA herself calling.....they knew she had seen RB.....just maybe they took that road trip and found something. I know it's a stretch, but wouldn't that just be awesome.....she would $hit.

I wouldn't put anything past Juan. I see him as a chess player. Something like what you mentioned, he would have to disclose to the defense, unless he waits until, say, this week to do it.

Or maybe his plan is to trick her into agreeing she shot him first and then put on an expert like Beasley to say the gun was used first but in premeditated murder and she only went to the knife when the gun jammed.

I was thinking, how about putting someone on the stand who knew that gun and knew it jammed, say like her father?

IMO

 

[katiewonders]

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

Molly, I see it differently, I think the gun is relevant. The State has to show that this is not a self-defense case. Whichever 'weapon' was first and incapacitated/killed, or even slowed him down or knocked him out - she would then have had no reason to continue the attack, to defend her life. She then could have left the house, called 911, etc.

But JA continued the brutal attack, not self-defense, murder 1.

All MHO

 

[katiewonders]

Law of Attraction. Peterson killed his wife so he could be with another woman who already had a child and that woman testified against him and made their case.

Law of Attraction. Jodi wanted to be a professional photograph and take award winning pictures. It was pictures from a camera she was using that has made the case for the State.

If you put out a strong negative (such as killing someone) you get it back 10 fold. jmo

Has anyone's mom ever said "What goes around, comes around."? Mine did, the Law of Attraction is just re-packaged mom-isms, lol.

 

[josie1986]

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

I respectfully disagree
Pre meditation imo isnt just about bringing a weapon with you or such it can be something that is decided in minutes irrespective if you brought a weapon with you.

Someone posted a great example of premeditated murder vs unplanned but it was many threads ago so I can't find it

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Southern_Meadow]

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

Not a chance. Murder 1. Planned out and carried out from start to finish. I'd believe in unicorns and leprechauns before I'd believe this was anything less than 1st degree murder.

 

[katiewonders]

What happened to the little 'thanks' button? Is it missing for everyone or just me?

You need to be logged in to see the "thanks" button, and someone here said you'll get logged out if you don't post something for awhile. Hope that helps.
:seeya:

 

[popsicle]

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

Murder 1 is being charged two ways... premed and also during the commission of a felony/ burglary.

 

[Ammonitida]

If the State's case is that she killed him with the knife and used the knife first, then the gun becomes irrelevant.

Now you have the only weapon that could be tied to premeditation becoming irrelevant.

You can throw out all her testimony and you still don't have murder one, unless the State fixes this problem.

You cannot prove she brought that knife even from another room to prove premeditation. Maybe she just reached out and grabbed it on the bathroom floor where it was dropped after the cutting of the rope.

Maybe this is murder two or manslaughter.

IMO

The gun does not become irrelevant if the jury believes that Jodi brought the gun with her. If they believe it, that proves premeditation by itself. It matters not which came first just that she used this gun at one point to kill him. Remember, the gun belonging to Travis is central to her current story. If that is not believed and state's theory about the gun is believed, premeditated murder is the only logical conclusion.

 

[molly333]

Molly, I see it differently, I think the gun is relevant. The State has to show that this is not a self-defense case. Whichever 'weapon' was first and incapacitated/killed, or even slowed him down or knocked him out - she would then have had no reason to continue the attack, to defend her life. She then could have left the house, called 911, etc.

But JA continued the brutal attack, not self-defense, murder 1.

All MHO

well I tend to agree with you but...let's say it cannot be proven she brought the murder weapon with her, which it cannot be if it's the knife. Then we have a garden variety knife fight. The gun did not kill him and was used last, after he was dead, or maybe as a way to put him out of his suffering when he was near death.

So far, this is the State's case, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why because that is not murder one.

 

[popsicle]

You need to be logged in to see the "thanks" button, and someone here said you'll get logged out if you don't post something for awhile. Hope that helps.
:seeya:

When you log in just click the keep me logged in box and that will keep you logged in. hth

eta sometimes when you post you lose the thanks button...just refresh the page and it will come back.

 

[popsicle]

I respectfully disagree
Pre meditation imo isnt just about bringing a weapon with you or such it can be something that is decided in minutes irrespective if you brought a weapon with you.

Someone posted a great example of premeditated murder vs unplanned but it was many threads ago so I can't find it

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Exactly. You can plan to kill someone and use their knife or use your hands or their gun. It is the plan to kill prior to the act of doing so no matter how many seconds before doing so. ty

 

[minor4th]

well I tend to agree with you but...let's say it cannot be proven she brought the murder weapon with her, which it cannot be if it's the knife. Then we have a garden variety knife fight. The gun did not kill him and was used last, after he was dead, or maybe as a way to put him out of his suffering when he was near death.

So far, this is the State's case, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why because that is not murder one.

Even if she shot him to put him out of his misery, that is still premeditated murder.

 

[BritsKate]

BBM

So true and to the point. I have been up over 24 hrs now because reading some of the posts last night in regards to questioning why Travis didn't do this or that, after he had the warning signs... just bothered me so much. I get someone not understanding this but when others take the time to explain it only to have it blatantly ignored just really bothers me as a victim and for all victims. .sigh.

I've been debating whether or not to post some of the clearly psychopathic behaviors of my ex...not just the abusive ones. (For those not in the know - not all abusers are psychopaths but all psychopaths are abusive. Studies also seems to suggest a much higher prevalence of psychopathy among those who abuse. Not really all that surprising, I guess. )

I will, just a handful, only to illustrate you well and truly just cannot anticipate what a psychopath is capable of. This is just a small list off the top of my head.

My ex had the woman he was having an affair with pose as a guy to befriend me online. Over the course of several months I began to confide in whom I thought was a friend. Once I told 'him' how unhappy I was in my marriage my ex magically appeared with printouts of every single conversation I'd had, accusing me of being unfaithful and cheating on him. The printouts were redacted to 'engineer' damning evidence...or rather, misconstrue anything that even reasonably could be.

Stole my mother's wedding ring from the biomedical bag the hospital returned it in following her death.

Stole $5,000 from my father while he was in extremely poor health. My father passed away two weeks after this and I paid the estate back through my inheritance.

Secretly opened an account I could not access in order to move my inheritance from our joint account to only his.

Attempted suicide in front of his 12 year old daughter after calling me, in front of her, to tell me I could explain to her how it was my fault her daddy was dead.

Told my 14 year old niece he would never have raped her had I not left the marriage. Then denied ever doing it at all, or saying that, then plead guilty to avoid a longer sentence.

Told his family, with such conviction, how horrible I was they ultimately believed him and became proxies in intimidation, cyber stalking, and abusive behaviors. My teenage nieces, who were online friends, would apprise my ex of every blog post, photo, and update only friends could see. My ex-MIL sent my ex, by this time in prison, a picture of my house in England from google earth. My ex sent me a birthday card with a hand drawn rendition on my house on the front.

My ex didn't so much as wish me a happy birthday for our first seven years together - yet at a surprise party thrown by my sister years later he gave me a diamond necklace. Gotta keep up appearances, donthcha know.

Stole our son's video games and console so our son would prefer to spend time with his dad - yet he made it very clear he had no use for our daughter. Even now, he sends cards and letters to our son but misses our daughter's birthday every single year.
---------------------------------------------------------
After all this I can only add there is no preparation in life for a psychopath. They don't come with a warning label and at first appear to be perfect beyond measure. I didn't know anything was really wrong until I was so deeply trapped in the relationship I couldn't leave easily.

Post-abuse, post-relationship...I have to monitor communications between ex and kiddos after several abusive and threatening letters to them. I personally maintain a very strict no contact with ex and ex-MIL. I educate munchkins about their's father's behaviors that are unacceptable and why. And kiddos have been coached about what they can't tell their grandmother, because she will tell their father, and he will use it against us somehow. It isn't ideal - but no contact and ensuring my privacy (which stems against how much the psychopath can use to hurt you) is really the only way I've found of 'coping'.

 

[SweetT]

This is the most premeditated murder case I have ever seen.

 

[Ammonitida]

well I tend to agree with you but...let's say it cannot be proven she brought the murder weapon with her, which it cannot be if it's the knife. Then we have a garden variety knife fight. The gun did not kill him and was used last, after he was dead, maybe as a way to put him out of his suffering.

So far, this is the State's case, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why because that is not murder one.

I think it was proved that the gun came with her. The prosecution provided the evidence that a 25 auto was stolen 5 days before she embarked on her murder trip that would see Travis dead by a gunshot from 25. Her eventual disposal of the weapon being another indication that she owned the gun at one time. Her illogical stories about Travis's gun, her twice telling detectives that Travis didn't own handguns early on in the investigation. You link it together and it becomes PROOF.

 

[molly333]

The gun does not become irrelevant if the jury believes that Jodi brought the gun with her. If they believe it, that proves premeditation by itself. It matters not which came first just that she used this gun at one point to kill him. Remember, the gun belonging to Travis is central to her current story. If that is not believed and state's theory about the gun is believed, premeditated murder is the only logical conclusion.

It's not murder one if she doesn't use the gun to kill him, per the ME's testimony.