The state Rests in The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #12

[Nova]

Hey Nova - You seem to have a lot of knowledge about the legal community, so I appreciate your insight. What about at the bar level though? Who sits on the bar and decides whether or not to act on a complaint against a lawyer? Sorry, I should have been clearer.

Did Baez get a pass because the judicial system didn't pursue it, or did the bar investigate and award him that pass? He was threatened by Judge Perry with contempt, and IMO that should have been followed through on. And then there was the alleged witness tampering (the TE volunteer), and the Dominique Casey testimony about who should or shouldn't be notified if Caylee's remains were found. It went way beyond his opening promises.

If JA's lawyer is in any way found incompetent and she gets a mistrial, then I think the various bars need to take a closer look at who they allow to practice. This is an important case, and it shouldn't be a total waste just because this particular DT seems to be disinterested. Again MOO.

Princess, any lawyer who wants to practice has to be a "member of the bar" in the states where he will try cases. (Or he has to have local co-counsel beside him and special permission to appear in court.)

But I assume you mean the state bar disciplinary committee. Here's a link for California:

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Attorneys/LawyerRegulation.aspx

I've never known anyone who served on the committee or was called before it, so I'm not sure how it is staffed.

I do think (and this is my impression from true crime sites such as this one) that if an attorney is zealously representing his client, then most judges aren't going to pursue errors beyond the confines of the trial. (Of course the defendant will list each and every error by opposing counsel in his appeal, but my friends who are appellate attorneys say appeals courts bend over backwards to avoid overturning a verdict.)

Actual malpractice among lawyers is another matter, but I have heard individuals say it's hard to find a lawyer who wants to go after his colleagues in civil court. Don't quote me. That's just something I've heard said.

I don't know if Baez was investigated; I haven't researched the matter. I would think we would have all heard if it had come to that, but I honestly don't know. CA was acquitted, of course, so its hard to go before a panel and argue that Baez didn't do his job.

If JA is convicted, there will be an appeal questioning the competence of her attorney. I am told that is the easiest kind of appeal to win. If JA is condemned to death, it will be practically automatic.

 

[Nana46]

Thank u so much! I had never seen that pic before.

Yes thank you Questor!! I kept asking about a shower door before and I clearly saw the door in that picture and the glass....whoa don't know how I have missed that photo all these days,lol.

 

[Isabelle]

Coincidence? Investigation Discovery showing "Stalked" about a man who is stalked and murdered by a woman! Hope the jurors caught this show!

 

[danzn16]

I wish that we could inquire of our Joypath, but she is professionally tied up with another case whsere at WS and RL with many small special angels, God Bless

It appears our own pathologist did make a statement on whether the shot came 1st or last. She sides with Horn.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - **Graphic and adult content**Jodia Arias Trial Discussion #7

Would still love to hear what she has to say about Terry's scenarios! Pretty sure it would be similar to what I said, the human body just doesn't work that way.

 

[Linda7NJ]

‎"According to Pat Brown, founder of the Pat Brown Criminal Profiling Agency.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/jodi-arias_n_1174274.html

You all already know I concur with Pat Brown


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atthelake]

Shades of gray....pun intended with the Drew Peterson case and is what is going on with Broadsky....or speaking of shades of gray, the Bob and Jane Bashara case!

Princess, any lawyer who wants to practice has to be a "member of the bar" in the states where he will try cases. (Or he has to have local co-counsel beside him and special permission to appear in court.)

But I assume you mean the state bar disciplinary committee. Here's a link for California:

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Attorneys/LawyerRegulation.aspx

I've never known anyone who served on the committee or was called before it, so I'm not sure how it is staffed.

I do think (and this is my impression from true crime sites such as this one) that if an attorney is zealously representing his client, then most judges aren't going to pursue errors beyond the confines of the trial. (Of course the defendant will list each and every error by opposing counsel in his appeal, but my friends who are appellate attorneys say appeals courts bend over backwards to avoid overturning a verdict.)

Actual malpractice among lawyers is another matter, but I have heard individuals say it's hard to find a lawyer who wants to go after his colleagues in civil court. Don't quote me. That's just something I've heard said.

I don't know if Baez was investigated; I haven't researched the matter. I would think we would have all heard if it had come to that, but I honestly don't know. CA was acquitted, of course, so its hard to go before a panel and argue that Baez didn't do his job.

If JA is convicted, there will be an appeal questioning the competence of her attorney. I am told that is the easiest kind of appeal to win. If JA is condemned to death, it will be practically automatic.

 

[popsicle]

*Sigh, I guess I just like to get technical. LOL. I just wonder why the other ME didn't say that.

Obviously this guy has a lot of experience but I guess I am wary of doctors that go on TV. Maybe for fame? Especially when there scenarios don't sound physiologically possible.

Typically I agree about the faces that show up on tv. This DR on HLN went over the wounds one by one and explained what he saw which all jived with the ME, including the GSW. The only thing he added was the legs/foot bruising part. He seemed very legit and knowledgeable. Looking at your link, it's funny because so many say a person doesn't bruise after death and they don't qualify that by saying unless it happens right around the time of death.

 

[popsicle]

You all already know I concur with Pat Brown


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Makes a great point why JA needs the DP and not LWOP. She would simply enjoy life in prison. On death row it is solitary confinement.

 

[minor4th]

Well, one thing I heard defense counsel say was that he wasn't sure a Brady violation required a showing of prejudice. I don't know if that's true or not, but that was his initial response to the Judge's question about what harm the defense sustained due to the initial failure to produce the text messages.

This issue has already been ruled on, more than once. The upcoming hearings are on different issues IMO.

 

[Sulamith]

Coincidence? Investigation Discovery showing "Stalked" about a man who is stalked and murdered by a woman! Hope the jurors caught this show!

I was not able to watch the trial every day. But from what I did watch, I don't remember the PA stating that JA stalked TA or calling any witness that could state that he/she was witness to JA stalking TA or even that TA told anybody that it was JA stalking him. So, if stalking was not brought up in court, and a juror did happen to watch the "Stalked" episode on ID, it would not mean anything to them as far as the JA trial. Anyway, the ID case is a whole different case from the case they are jurors on. :moo:

 

[Isabelle]

I apologize, this sounds gross as I am typing this, but I have heard that a chicken keeps moving even after you cut off its head. Do you think she shot him in the end because he was still moving? ughh, sorry......

I thought he might have had agonal breathing and she thought he was not dead.

 

[minor4th]

Since in her phonecalls with Flores, she talks about them exchanging facebook/gmail/myspace passwords, I want to know how many times and how frequently they each accessed each others accounts.

If they don't have this investigation it is lazy detective work. They may have not paid attention to all the correspondence and forensic account information because with the photos and palmprint and blood, they thought they already had a slamdunk.

Or they may have been working with a restricted budget. That would not be unheard of in this county in Arizona.

BUT - if defense tries to admit email/facebook correspondence, they really shouldn't be allowed in unless they have evidence of the originating IP addresses to prove that it was actually Travis sending the messages.

 

[Straitfan]

Jodi and Travis are the ONLY ones who know what happened in "what" order it happened....The rest are just "estimated" guesses based on theory..jmo

 

[2door73chevy]

i don't get it. So she disposes (leaves) with the knife and gun, but leaves the cup there? Were there any fingerprints (oil) obtained? I'd have to guess she may have been wearing gloves at that point. Makes no sense.

MOO

Mel

I think the cup was there to help with the bathing of Napolean, so I don't think Jodi had a reason to take it with her..KWIM?

 

[minor4th]

I was not able to watch the trial every day. But from what I did watch, I don't remember the PA stating that JA stalked TA or calling any witness that could state that he/she was witness to JA stalking TA or even that TA told anybody that it was JA stalking him. So, if stalking was not brought up in court, and a juror did happen to watch the "Stalked" episode on ID, it would not mean anything to them as far as the JA trial. Anyway, the ID case is a whole different case from the case they are jurors on. :moo:

The defense did bring up the stalking in its cross-examination of Mimi and of Flores. Mimi was very careful to say that Travis never mentioned who the stalker was and never said it was Jodi. The prosecution has conspicuously avoided the stalking issue. This is a strategy IMO, but I believe it goes beyond the state not wanting to prejudice the jury with inflammatory evidence.

 

[polleypockets]

I was not able to watch the trial every day. But from what I did watch, I don't remember the PA stating that JA stalked TA or calling any witness that could state that he/she was witness to JA stalking TA or even that TA told anybody that it was JA stalking him. So, if stalking was not brought up in court, and a juror did happen to watch the "Stalked" episode on ID, it would not mean anything to them as far as the JA trial. Anyway, the ID case is a whole different case from the case they are jurors on. :moo:

mimi did mention in her testimony about TA being stalked, that his tires were slashed and that IIRC some one followed them on their date, but said TA did not tell her it was jodi - i can't remember exact testimony

 

[Sulamith]

I apologize, this sounds gross as I am typing this, but I have heard that a chicken keeps moving even after you cut off its head. Do you think she shot him in the end because he was still moving? ughh, sorry......

That is what my husband thinks. He does not watch the trial or read forums, I just filled him in on a few details and he thinks the gunshot came last. I read alot and sometimes my mind spins with all the info so I am not sure. But my husb. thought after all the damage JA inflicted on TA and in his last breath, movement, she shot him because he would not die.

 

[Isabelle]

I could never find a link to the actual autopsy report until today (thank you Minor4th). In reading the report, it is somewhat different than what the ME testified to. It states:
"The wound track perforates the anterior frontal skull near the superior oribital bone and transverses the right anterior fossa, without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage or apparent cerebral injury." It goes on to talk about the decomposition limiting the exan. And then under Nervous System states " The dura mater and falx cerebri are intact." The dura mater is the tuff, fibrous covering of the brain. Then "Multiple serial sections of autolyzed brain do not reveal the presence of grossly apparent trauma, foreign bodies, or previously existing natural disaease."

So he testified that the bullet went theough the brain but the autopsy report states otherwise as far as what I'm reading.

Link: http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/redactedtravisautopsy.pdf

That is strange. I hope he read his report carefully. Makes me wonder if the transcriptionist made up what the doc left out?!

 

[Curious Me]

"Female inmates on Death Row are housed at the Lumley Unit at the Arizona State Prison Complex-Perryville, near Goodyear Arizona."

"Each cell at the Lumley Unit is 12 feet by 7 feet, 2 inches, a total of 86.4 square feet."


About Arizona's Death Row --- http://www.azcorrections.gov/dr_faq.aspx

"Since 1937, the average Arizona Death Row inmate has spent 12 years on death row."

 

[*~Aimee~*]

Just my thoughts. It looks like the plastic glass/cup was originally there and the blood, etc. settled around it. When the body was moved the glass moved and left that mark. Hope that makes sense.

I could be totally wrong, but that's what it looks like to me.

i agree